AGA Rapid Recommendations for Gastrointestinal Procedures During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Burden and Cost of Gastrointestinal, Liver, and Pancreatic Diseases in the United States: Update 2024

BACKGROUND

A contemporary report describing the burden and expenditures of gastrointestinal (GI) diseases can be helpful for policy makers, administrators, and researchers. Using the most recent data, we estimated the burden and costs associated with GI diseases in the United States.

METHODS

We generated estimates using data from the Rome Foundation Global Epidemiology Study 2017-2018 (symptoms), National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey 2019 and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey 2019 (ambulatory visits), Nationwide Emergency Department Sample 2021 (emergency department visits), National Inpatient Sample 2021 (admissions), Kids' Inpatient Database 2019 (admissions), National Program of Cancer Registries 2001-2021 (cancer incidence), National Center for Health Statistics 2001-2021 (cancer mortality), Centers for Disease Control Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research 2021 (non-cancer mortality), MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters data 2002-2021 (endoscopy), MarketScan Medicare Supplemental data 2002-2021 (endoscopy), United Network for Organ Sharing Registry 2023 (transplant), Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 2021 (expenditures), and National Institutes of Health (NIH) 2012-2025 (research).

RESULTS

In 2021, GI health care expenditures totaled $111.8 billion. A GI diagnosis or symptom led to 14.5 million emergency department visits and 2.9 million hospital admissions. There were 315,065 new GI cancers diagnosed. GI diseases caused 281,413 deaths. In 2022, an estimated 23.5 million GI endoscopies were performed. In 2023, the NIH supported $3.6 billion for GI research, which represents 7.4% of the NIH budget.

CONCLUSION

GI diseases are responsible for a considerable and growing burden of health care use and costs. Funding innovative GI science and supporting the practice of GI medicine are critical to meeting the burden of GI illness.

Increased gastrointestinal bleeding-related mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Despite its significant health burden, there is a lack of national-level temporal patterns in gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) mortality.

Objectives

To comprehensively decipher the annual and monthly trend of GIB-related mortality in the United States.

Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

We analyzed the National Vital Statistic System database, which documents more than 99% of the annual deaths in the United States for GIB-related deaths from January 2010 to May 2023. Annual and monthly age-standardized mortality rates were estimated and categorized by age, sex, and bleeding site. Joinpoint regression was performed for trend analysis. Prediction modeling was conducted to determine the GIB-associated excess mortality.

Results

A total of 529,094 and 210,641 GIB-associated deaths occurred before and after 2020, respectively. Following a stably decreasing trend between 2010 and 2019, there was an excess mortality rate during the pandemic which peaked in 2021. The monthly mortality trend showed spikes corresponding to the outbreak of variants. Importantly, excess GIB-related mortality resolved in 2023, with the convergence of predicted and observed mortality rates. Subgroup analysis showed that young males (aged 19-44 years) were affected the most during the pandemic, with excess mortality rates of 35.80%, 52.77%, and 31.46% in 2020, 2021, and 2022, respectively. While the increasing trend of upper GIB was accentuated during the pandemic, lower GIB showed a reversal of the pre-pandemic decreasing trend.

Conclusion

Our findings demonstrate the trend of GIB-related mortality, underscoring an increased excess death during the pandemic followed by a resolution in 2023. We identify subpopulations vulnerable to the pandemic.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical practices related to colorectal cancer and colonoscopy in South Korea: a nationwide population-based study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Despite of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there is little data regarding its impact on colorectal cancer (CRC)-related clinical practice. This study aimed to assess the changes in its impact during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This was a retrospective national population-based study using the Health Insurance Review and Assessment database from January 2019 to December 2021. The number of patients in 2020 and 2021 was compared with those in 2019 for the diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy, CRC-related operation, and any treatment for CRC.

RESULTS

The annual number of patients undergoing diagnostic colonoscopies decreased by 6.9% in 2020 but increased 8.1% in 2021, compared to those in 2019; number of patients undergoing therapeutic colonoscopies increased by 6.0% and 37.7% in 2020 and 2021, respectively; number of patients operated for CRC decreased by 4.2% in 2020 and increased by 2.3% in 2021. The number of patients treated for CRC decreased by 2.8% in 2020 and increased by 4.4% in 2021. Diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopies and any CRC-related treatment decreased by 43.8%, 37.5%, and 11.3% in March 2020, during the first surge of COVID-19, but increased by 26.0%, 58.1%, and 9.5% in June 2021, respectively. CRC-related operations decreased by 24.1% in April 2020 and increased by 12.6% in August 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical practices related to CRC completely recovered within second year. It could be considered for the development of an optimal strategy on CRC management in response to the pandemic-driven crisis.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on esophageal cancer resource allocation: a systematic review

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic challenged global infrastructure. Healthcare systems were forced to reallocate resources toward the frontlines. In this systematic review, we analyze the impact of resource reallocation during the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis, management, and outcomes of esophageal cancer (EC) patients.

Methods

PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for articles investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on EC patients. Of the 1,722 manuscripts initially screened, 23 met the inclusion criteria.

Results

Heterogeneity of data and outcomes reporting prohibited aggregate analysis. Reduced detection of EC and considerable variability in disease stage at presentation were noted during the COVID-19 pandemic. EC patients experienced delays in diagnostic and preoperative staging investigations but surgical resection was not associated with greater short-term morbidity or mortality. Modeling the impact of pandemic-related delays in EC care predicts significant reductions in survival with associated economic losses in the coming years.

Conclusions

Amidst resource scarcity during the COVID-19 pandemic, the multidisciplinary management of patients with EC was affected at multiple stages in the care pathway. Although the complete ramifications of reductions in EC diagnosis and delays in care remain unclear, EC surgery was able to safely continue as a result of collaboration between centers, strict adherence to COVID-19 protective measures, and reallocation of healthcare resources towards the same. Ultimately, when healthcare systems are pushed to the brink, the downstream consequences of resource reallocation require judicious analysis to optimize overall patient outcomes.

Pandemic-Related Changes in Incidence and Mortality Rates of Gastrointestinal Cancers During 2020

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus Disease 2019 disrupted cancer-related care in early 2020.

METHODS

We used population-based cancer registry data to estimate incidence and mortality rates of gastrointestinal cancers between 2016 and 2020.

RESULTS

Incidence rates were unchanged from 2016 to 2019 but decreased in 2020, with the largest declines for colorectal cancer (rate ratio [RR] 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-0.90) and hepatocellular carcinoma (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.82-0.88). Mortality rates of colorectal cancer (RR 1.06; 95% CI 1.04-1.08) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (RR 1.06; 95% CI 1.00-1.13) increased in 2020.

DISCUSSION

Incidence and mortality rates of gastrointestinal cancers may increase in the future given pandemic-related delays in 2020.

Significant Reduction in the Diagnosis of Barrett's Esophagus and Related Dysplasia During the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted endoscopy practices, creating unprecedented decreases in cancer screening and surveillance services. We aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on the proportion of patients diagnosed with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and BE-related dysplasia and adherence to established quality indicators.

METHODS

Data from all esophagogastroduodenoscopies in the GI Quality Improvement Consortium, a national repository of matched endoscopy and pathology data, were analyzed from January 2018 to December 2022. Four cohorts were created based on procedure date and COVID-19 data: pre-pandemic (January 2018 to February 2020), pandemic-phase I (March 2020 to July 2020), pandemic-phase II (August 2020 to May 2021), and pandemic-phase III (June 2021 to December 2022). Observed and expected number of BE and BE-related dysplasia cases per month and adherence to the Seattle biopsy protocol and recommended surveillance intervals for nondysplastic BE (NDBE) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 2,446,857 esophagogastroduodenoscopies performed during the study period, 104,124 (4.3%) had pathology-confirmed BE. The histologic distribution was 87.4% NDBE, 1.8% low-grade dysplasia, 2.4% indefinite for dysplasia, and 1.4% high-grade dysplasia. The number of monthly BE (-47.9% pandemic-phase I, -21.5% pandemic-phase II, and -19.0% pandemic-phase III) and BE-related dysplasia (high-grade dysplasia: 41.2%, -27.7%, and -19.0%; low-grade dysplasia: 49.1%, -35.3%, and -26.5%; any dysplasia: 46.7%, -32.3%, and -27.9%) diagnoses were significantly reduced during the pandemic phases compared with pre-pandemic data. Adherence rates to the Seattle protocol and recommended surveillance intervals for NDBE did not decline during the pandemic.

DISCUSSION

There was a significant decline in the number of BE and BE-related dysplasia diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic, with an approximately 50% reduction in the number of cases of dysplasia diagnosed in the early pandemic. The absence of a compensatory increase in diagnoses in the pandemic-phase II and III periods may result in deleterious downstream effects on esophageal adenocarcinoma morbidity and mortality.

Atypical Complications during the Course of COVID-19: A Comprehensive Review

COVID-19 is primarily a respiratory disease, but numerous studies have indicated the involvement of various organ systems during the course of illness. We conducted a comprehensive review of atypical complications of COVID-19 with their incidence range (IR) and their impact on hospitalization and mortality rates. We identified 97 studies, including 55 research articles and 42 case studies. We reviewed four major body organ systems for various types of atypical complications: (i) Gastro-intestinal (GI) and hepatobiliary system, e.g., bowel ischemia/infarction (IR: 1.49-83.87%), GI bleeding/hemorrhage (IR: 0.47-10.6%), hepatic ischemia (IR: 1.0-7.4%); (ii) Neurological system, e.g., acute ischemic stroke/cerebral venous sinus thrombosis/cerebral hemorrhage (IR: 0.5-90.9%), anosmia (IR: 4.9-79.6%), dysgeusia (IR: 2.8-83.38%), encephalopathy/encephalitis with or without fever and hypoxia (IR: 0.19-35.2%); (iii) Renal system, e.g., acute kidney injury (AKI)/acute renal failure (IR: 0.5-68.8%); (iv) Cardiovascular system, e.g., acute cardiac injury/non-coronary myocardial injury (IR: 7.2-55.56%), arrhythmia/ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (IR: 5.9-16.7%), and coagulopathy/venous thromboembolism (IR: 19-34.4%). This review encourages and informs healthcare practitioners to keenly monitor COVID-19 survivors for these atypical complications in all major organ systems and not only treat the respiratory symptoms of patients. Post-COVID effects should be monitored, and follow-up of patients should be performed on a regular basis to check for long-term complications.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Performance of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Background/Aims

Non-time-sensitive gastrointestinal endoscopy was deferred because of the risk of exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but no population-based studies have quantified the adverse impact on gastrointestinal procedures. This study examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the performance of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, ERCP, and abdominal ultrasonography (US) in South Korea.

Methods

This nationwide, population-based study compared the claim data of EGD, colonoscopy, ERCP, and abdominal US in 2020 and 2021 (COVID-19 era) with those in 2019 (before the COVID-19 era).

Results

During the first year (2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic, the annual claim data of EGD and colonoscopy were reduced by 6.3% and 6.9%, respectively, but those of ERCP and abdominal US were increased by 1.0% and 2.9%, compared to those in 2019. During the first surge (March and April 2020) of COVID-19, the monthly claim data of EGD, colonoscopy, ERCP, and abdominal US were reduced by 28.8%, 43.8%, 5.1%, and 21.6%, respectively, in March 2020, and also reduced by 17.2%, 32.8%, 4.4%, and 9.5%, respectively, in April 2020, compared to those in March and April 2019. During March and April 2020, the monthly claims of ERCP, compared with those in 2019, declined less significantly than those of EGD and colonoscopy (both p<0.001).

Conclusions

The claims of EGD and colonoscopy were reduced more significantly than those of ERCP and abdominal US during the COVID-19 pandemic because ERCPs are time-sensitive procedures and abdominal USs are non-aerosolized procedures.

Gastrointestinal hospitalization during COVID-19 pandemic in the United States: Analysis of a nationwide inpatient sample

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We aim to systematically investigate gastrointestinal (GI) hospitalizations in the United States during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic on a national level and the consequence that may inform practice and policies.

METHODS

A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of adult hospitalizations with GI-related diagnoses or procedures in the United States in 2020 was used, with hospitalizations from 2016 to 2019 used for contextual information.

RESULTS

Hospitalizations with principal and secondary GI diagnoses decreased by 13.3% and 8.2% from 2019 to 2020, respectively. Most GI diagnoses decreased in 2020, with a few exceptions including alcoholic liver disease (increased by 7.8% as a principal diagnosis) and acute liver failure (increased by 11.6% as a secondary diagnosis). The mortality rate of hospitalizations with GI disease increased in 2020 compared with 2019 (for principal diagnosis: adjusted odds ratio 1.08, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.13, P = 0.001; for secondary diagnosis: adjusted odds ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 1.07-1.13, P < 0.001). Most GI procedures decreased except for a notable 8.3% increase in gastrostomy. The per-GI-hospitalization rate of procedures increased for hospitalizations with a principal GI diagnosis (56.4% vs 55.6%, P = 0.003) or unchanged for hospitalizations with secondary GI diagnoses (18.3% vs 18.2%, P = 0.512).

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a decrease in the volume of GI hospitalizations and procedures in 2020, but there was an increase in the mortality rate and some specific diagnoses including alcoholic liver disease and acute liver failure. These findings will likely enlighten future research and healthcare resource allocation for GI diseases.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in colorectal cancer diagnosis and presentation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a decrease in the colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence, due to the disruption of screening programmes and a downscaling of endoscopic activity. The endpoint of this study is to evaluate if the pandemic has led to a change in CRC diagnostic rate and presentation in our population.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective study of all public hospitals of the Aragon region, attending a population of 1,329,391 inhabitants. We have analyzed all CRC cases detected and endoscopic units workload the year before the pandemic onset (1 March 2019-14 March 2020) and the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (15 March 2020-28 February 2021).

RESULTS

The diagnosis of CRC cases dropped a 38.9% (888 pre-pandemic vs 542 pandemic cases). Also, there were 30.3% less colonoscopies performed (24,860 vs 17,337). During the pandemic, CRC cases were diagnosed in older patients (72.4±12.2 vs 71.2±12.1 years, p=0.021), and had more frequently severe complications at diagnosis (14.6% vs 10.4%, p=0.019). Moreover, most CRC cases were diagnosed in symptomatic patients (81.4%). No significant difference was found in CRC stage at diagnosis, although stage IV was more frequent (20.1% vs 16.1%). Most hospitals reported a lower workload of endoscopic activity.

CONCLUSION

CRC diagnostic rate was lower after the onset of the pandemic. CRC was diagnosed in older patients and was more frequently associated with complications. After the onset of the pandemic, the endoscopic units did not reach the workload performed previously.

Cancer Screening Disparities Before and After the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer-screening disparities existed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and it is unclear whether those have changed since the pandemic.

Objective

To assess whether changes in screening from before the pandemic to after the pandemic varied for immigrants and for people with limited income.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based, cross-sectional study, using data from March 31, 2019, and March 31, 2022, included adults in Ontario, Canada, the country's most populous province, with more than 14 million people, almost 30% of whom are immigrants. At both dates, the screening-eligible population for each cancer type was assessed.

Exposures

Neighborhood income quintile, immigrant status, and primary care model type.

Main Outcomes and Measures

For each cancer screening type, the main outcome was whether the screening-eligible population was up to date on screening (a binary outcome) on March 31, 2019, and March 31, 2022. Up to date on screening was defined as having had a mammogram in the previous 2 years, a Papanicolaou test in the previous 3 years, and a fecal test in the previous 2 years or a flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in the previous 10 years.

Results

The overall cohort on March 31, 2019, included 1 666 943 women (100%) eligible for breast screening (mean [SD] age, 59.9 [5.1] years), 3 918 225 women (100%) eligible for cervical screening (mean [SD] age, 45.5 [13.2] years), and 3 886 345 people eligible for colorectal screening (51.4% female; mean [SD] age, 61.8 [6.4] years). The proportion of people up to date on screening in Ontario decreased for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers, with the largest decrease for breast screening (from 61.1% before the pandemic to 51.7% [difference, -9.4 percentage points]) and the smallest decrease for colorectal screening (from 65.9% to 62.0% [difference, -3.9 percentage points]). Preexisting disparities in screening for people living in low-income neighborhoods and for immigrants widened for breast screening and colorectal screening. For breast screening, compared with income quintile 5 (highest), the β estimate for income quintile 1 (lowest) was -1.16 (95% CI, -1.56 to -0.77); for immigrant vs nonimmigrant, the β estimate was -1.51 (95% CI, -1.84 to -1.18). For colorectal screening, compared with income quintile 5, the β estimate for quntile 1 was -1.29 (95% CI, 16 -1.53 to -1.06); for immigrant vs nonimmigrant, the β estimate was -1.41 (95% CI, -1.61 to -1.21). The lowest screening rates both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic were for people who had no identifiable family physician (eg, moving from 11.3% in 2019 to 9.6% in 2022 up to date for breast cancer). In addition, patients of interprofessional, team-based primary care models had significantly smaller reductions in β estimates for breast (2.14 [95% CI, 1.79 to 2.49]), cervical (1.72 [95% CI, 1.46 to 1.98]), and colorectal (2.15 [95% CI, 1.95 to 2.36]) postpandemic screening and higher uptake of screening in general compared with patients of other primary care models.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study in Ontario that included 2 time points, widening disparities before compared with after the COVID-19 pandemic were found for breast cancer and colorectal cancer screening based on income and immigrant status, but smaller declines in disparities were found among patients of interprofessional, team-based primary care models than among their counterparts. Policy makers should investigate the value of prioritizing and investing in improving access to team-based primary care for people who are immigrants and/or with limited income.

The elderly population are more vulnerable for the management of colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide, population-based study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the management of colorectal cancer (CRC) may worse in elderly population, as almost all COVID-19 deaths occurred in the elderly patients. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on CRC management in the elderly population.

METHODS

The numbers of patients who underwent colonoscopy, who visited hospitals or operated for CRC in 2020 and 2021 (COVID-19 era) were compared with those in 2019, according to 3 age groups (≥70 years, 50-69 years, and ≤49 years), based on the nationwide, population-based database (2019-2021) in South Korea.

RESULTS

The annual volumes of colonoscopy and hospital visits for CRC in 2020 were more significantly declined in the old age group than in the young age group (both P<0.001). In addition, the annual volume of patients operated for CRC numerically more declined in old age group than in young age group. During the first surge of COVID-19 (March and April 2020), old age patients showed statistically significant declines for the monthly number of colonoscopies (-46.5% vs. -39.3%, P<0.001), hospital visits (-15.4% vs. -7.9%, P<0.001), CRC operations (-33.8% vs. -0.7%, P<0.05), and colonoscopic polypectomies (-41.8% vs. -38.0%, P<0.001) than young age patients, compared with those of same months in 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly population are more vulnerable for the management of CRC during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the elderly population are more carefully cared for in the management of CRC during the next pandemic.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and Gastric Cancer Claims in South Korea: A Nationwide, Population-Based Study

PURPOSE

There has been little information about the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and gastric cancer claims. This study aimed to measure the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on EGD and gastric cancer claims in South Korea.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This nationwide, population-based study compared the claims data of EGD, gastric cancer, early gastric cancer (EGC), advanced gastric cancer (AGC) and gastric cancer operation in 2020 and 2021 (COVID-19 era) to those in 2019 (before COVID-19 pandemic).

RESULTS

The annual claims of EGD, gastric cancer, EGC, and AGC were reduced by 6.3%, 5.0%, 4.7%, and 3.6% in 2020 and by 2.2%, 1.0%, 0.6%, and 1.9% in 2021, respectively, compared to 2019. The amount of annual claims of gastric cancer operation was reduced by 8.8% in 2020, but increased by 0.9% in 2021, compared to those in 2019. The monthly claims of EGD, gastric cancer, EGC, AGC, and gastric cancer operation were mainly reduced in the first epidemic wave of COVID-19, but decreased in the 2nd to 4th epidemic wave. Compared to 2019, the monthly claim of EGD, gastric cancer, EGC, AGC, and gastric cancer operation were reduced by 28.8%, 14.3%, 18.1%, 9.2%, and 5.8% in March 2020 and by 17.2%, 10.8%, 10.3%, 7.2%, and 35.4% in April 2020, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on EGD, gastric cancer, EGC, AGC, and gastric cancer operation was worst during the first surge of COVID-19, but decreased in the 2nd to 4th epidemic wave of the disease in 2020 and 2021.

THE IMPACT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND PROCEDURES IN A HIGH-VOLUME ENDOSCOPY UNIT IN BRAZIL

•In pancreatic neoplasms the EUS plays a key role in the management. •During the pandemic period, lockdown measures prevented patients with comorbidities from performing EUS. •The D-EUS decreased during COVID-19, while I-EUS increased and EUS-TA was the most commonly I-EUS procedure performed, with no increase in adverse events. •Despite the moderate impact of the pandemic period in endoscopic services around the world, EUS-TA of solid and cystic tumors of the pancreas was the main indication. Background - Reports of the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic period/2020 on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are scarce. Objective - We analyzed the impact of the pandemic period/2020 on the demographics, indications, and number of diagnostic EUS (D-EUS) and interventional EUS (I-EUS) procedures performed in a high-volume endoscopy unit compared with the previous non-pandemic period/2019. Methods - We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all patients undergoing D-EUS or I-EUS from March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020 (non-pandemic period/2019) and from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021 (pandemic period/2020). Data compared between the study periods included sex, age, comorbidities, EUS findings and diagnosis, need for interventional procedures during EUS, and adverse events (AEs). Results were significant at P<0.05. Results - EUS procedures decreased from 475 in the non-pandemic period/2019 to 289 in the pandemic period/2020, accounting for a 39% reduction. In non-pandemic period/2019, 388 (81.7%) D-EUS and 88 (18.5%) I-EUS were performed, against 206 (71.3%) D-EUS and 83 (28.7%) I-EUS in pandemic period/2020 (P=0.001). Only 5/289 (1.7%) patients had COVID-19. Fewer patients with comorbidities underwent EUS during pandemic period/2020 due to lockdown measures (P<0.001). D-EUS decreased, whereas I-EUS increased (P<0.001). EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) was the most common I-EUS, performed in 83/289 (28.7%) patients in pandemic period/2020, against 88/475 (18.5%) in non-pandemic period/2019 (P=0.001). AEs did not differ significantly between the study periods. Conclusion - Pandemic Period/2020 had a moderate impact on reducing EUS procedures due to the risks involved. Although I-EUS increased, EUS-related AEs did not. Solid and cystic pancreatic tumors remained a major indication for EUS-TA even during the pandemic period/2020.

Adherence with standard guidelines among doctors involved in aerosol generating procedures to control COVID-19 transmission

Objectives

To review the strategies for controlling COVID-19 transmission among doctors involved in aerosol generating procedures.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, Islamabad from September to November 2020, using a 21-itemed initially piloted self-administered questionnaire designed on Google forms. It was shared with doctors involved in Aerosol generating medical procedures (AGMPs) by using social media applications. After the data was collected, it was analyzed using SPSS version 21.

Results

A total of 136 doctors participated in the study that included 59 female and 77 male participants. Our 67 (49.3%) participants screened their patients for signs and symptoms of COVID-19 before a routine checkup. The most common disinfectant used for reusable medical equipment by 62 (45.6%) respondents was alcohol swab, 57 (41.9%) did not disinfect reusable equipment and 17 (12.5%) used Dettol water spray.

Conclusion

Majority of the doctors involved in AGMPS are not following the guidelines provided by international and national bodies. As such adherence to guidelines can help prevent COVID19 transmission in frontline doctors especially those involved in aerosol generating procedures.

CTC service heterogeneity and design of a workforce calculator

AIM

To determine the level of heterogeneity in delivery of computed tomography (CT) colonography services and develop a workforce calculator that accommodates the variation identified.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A national survey, based on the "WHO workforce indicators of staffing need", established activity standards for essential tasks in delivery of the service. From these data a workforce calculator was designed to guide the required staffing and equipment resource by service size.

RESULTS

Activity standards were established as mode responses >70%. Service homogeneity was greater in areas where professional standards and guidance were available. The mean service size was 1,101. Did not attend (DNA) rates were lower where direct booking was available (p<0.0001). Service sizes were larger where radiographer reporting was embedded in reporting paradigms (p<0.024).

CONCLUSION

The survey identified benefits of radiographer-led direct booking and reporting. The workforce calculator derived from the survey provides a framework to guide the resourcing of expansion while maintaining standards.

COVID-19 und gastrointestinale Endoskopie –angepasste Strategien im pandemischen Wandel

Im Dezember 2019 begann mit dem Ausbruch der Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) eine neue Herausforderung in vielen Bereichen der Medizin und des persönlichen Lebens. Der individuelle Schutz der professionellen Leistungsbringer vor der Infektion wurde zur Sicherung der Leistungsfähigkeit des Gesundheitssystems essenziell. Neue Arbeiten definierten die obere gastrointestinale Endoskopie als aerosolgenerierende Prozedur (AGP), die insbesondere aufgrund des engen Kontakts für das Personal ein erhöhtes Infektionsrisiko darstellt. Da das „severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2“ (SARS-CoV-2) in erster Linie durch Aerosole und/oder Tröpfchen übertragen wird, besteht die Notwendigkeit der Verwendung von persönlicher Schutzausrüstung („personal protective equipment“, PPE). Empfehlungen der Leitlinien haben entsprechend früh PPE als infektionspräventive Maßnahmen empfohlen. Die strikte Verwendung von PPE hat sich mit der Erfahrung aus nunmehr 3 Jahren als effektive Präventionsstrategie bewiesen. Mit der Einführung der Vakzinierung gegen SARS-CoV‑2, einer zunehmenden Immunisierung der Bevölkerung und einem sich ändernden pandemischen Infektionsgeschehen haben sich die Anforderungen für endoskopische Abteilungen in den Krankenhäusern und in der ambulanten Versorgung stetig geändert. In der postpandemischen Situation bestehen nur noch geringe Einschränkungen, die die neue „postpandemische Realität“ beeinflussen und die Durchführung endoskopischer Leistungen ohne größere Restriktionen ermöglichen. Die Anpassungen der infektionspräventiven Strategien im Verlauf der Pandemie und die erhobenen wissenschaftlichen Daten mit folgender Anpassung der aktuellen Empfehlungen bis zum heutigen Tag werden in dieser Arbeit zusammengefasst und diskutiert.

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019: Indications, Findings, and Safety

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the practice of gastroenterology and how we perform endoscopy. As with any new or emerging pathogen, early in the pandemic, there was limited evidence and understanding of disease transmission, limited testing capability, and resource constraints, especially availability of personal protective equipment (PPE). As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed, enhanced protocols with particular emphasis on assessing the risk status of patients and proper use of PPE have been incorporated into routine patient care. The COVID-19 pandemic has taught us important lessons for the future of gastroenterology and endoscopy.

[Pudov Surgical care in a multi-field hospital during the new coronavirus infection pandemic (SARS-COVID-19): a 5-year experience]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the 5-year experience of surgical care in a multi-field hospital during the coronavirus pandemic and before infection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We assessed «non-traumatic» surgery and the main indicators in a multi-field hospital during the coronavirus pandemic and surgical work in the «pre-COVID» period.

RESULTS

The number of discharged patients was the same between 2018 and 2021. In 2020-2021, mortality increased by 2.8 times, the number of deceased patients - by 2.5 times, hospitalizations for emergency surgical indications - by 2.1 times. Elective care decreased by 2.5 times. The number of adverse vascular events increased by 3 times.

CONCLUSION

Acute increase in emergency surgery and decrease in elective care create the prerequisites for growth of «neglect» with subsequent postoperative complications. We observed significant increase in mortality. It is advisable to create a backup emergency surgical service in infectious disease hospitals to provide care in obviously infected patients.

Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Clinical Diagnosis and Pharmaceutical Management

Inflammatory bowel disease has an enormous impact on public health, medical systems, economies, and social conditions. Biologic therapy has ameliorated the treatment and clinical course of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. The efficacy and safety profiles of currently available therapies are still less that optimal in numerous ways, highlighting the requirement for new therapeutic targets. A bunch of new drug studies are underway in inflammatory bowel disease with promising results. This is an outlined guideline of clinical diagnosis and pharmaceutical therapy of inflammatory bowel disease. Outline delineates the overall recommendations on the modern principles of desirable practice to bolster the adoption of best implementations and exploration as well as inflammatory bowel disease patient, gastroenterologist, and other healthcare provider education. Inflammatory bowel disease encompasses Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, the two unsolved medical inflammatory bowel disease-subtypes condition with no drug for cure. The signs and symptoms on first presentation relate to the anatomical localization and severity of the disease and less with the resulting diagnosis that can clinically and histologically be non-definitive to interpret and establish criteria, specifically in colonic inflammatory bowel disease when the establishment is inconclusive is classified as indeterminate colitis. Conservative pharmaceuticals and accessible avenues do not depend on the disease phenotype. The first line management is to manage symptoms and stabilize active disease; at the same time maintenance therapy is indicated. Nutrition and diet do not play a primary therapeutic role but is warranted as supportive care. There is need of special guideline that explore solution of groundwork gap in terms of access limitations to inflammatory bowel disease care, particularly in developing countries and the irregular representation of socioeconomic stratification with a strategic plan, for the unanswered questions and perspective for the future, especially during the surfaced global COVID-19 pandemic caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV2 impacting on both the patient's psychological functioning and endoscopy services. Establishment of a global registry system and accumulated experiences have led to consensus for inflammatory bowel disease management under the COVID-19 pandemic. Painstakingly, the pandemic has influenced medical care systems for these patients. I briefly herein viewpoint summarize among other updates the telemedicine roles during the pandemic and how operationally inflammatory bowel disease centers managed patients and ensured quality of care. In conclusion: inflammatory bowel disease has become a global emergent disease. Serious medical errors are public health problem observed in developing nations i.e., to distinguish inflammatory bowel disease and infectious and parasitic diseases. Refractory inflammatory bowel disease is a still significant challenge in the management of patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. There are gaps in knowledge and future research directions on the recent newly registered pharmaceuticals. The main clinical outcomes for inflammatory bowel disease were maintained during the COVID-19 pandemic period.

[Features of surgical patients of COVID-19 patients]

The novel coronavirus pandemic has significantly increased the workload of surgical service worldwide. Restrictive measures led to postponement of elective surgical and diagnostic interventions and reduced the number of emergency manipulations around the world. Large-scale studies identified optimal period for postponing surgical procedures and advisability of this postponement. The authors present opinions of surgeons and their views on treatment strategy for various elective and emergency surgical interventions in abdominal surgery, traumatology-orthopedics and oncology. The main factors reducing perioperative mortality in patients with a new coronavirus infection are observance of anti-epidemic measures by patients and medical personnel, competent use of personal protective equipment, as well as adherence to protocols and algorithms for the treatment of these patients.

Droplet nuclei are generated during colonoscopy and are decreased by the use of carbon dioxide and water immersion technique

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised concerns on whether colonoscopies (CS) carry a transmission risk. The aim was to determine whether CS are aerosol-generating procedures.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational trial including all patients undergoing CS at the Prince of Wales Hospital from 1 June to 31 July 2020. Three particle counters were placed 10 cm from each patient's anus and near the mouth of endoscopists and nurses. The particle counter recorded the number of particles of size 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 1, 5, and 10 μm. Patient demographics, seniority of endoscopists, use of CO₂ and water immersion technique, and air particle count (particles/cubic foot, dCF) were recorded. Multilevel modeling was used to test all the hypotheses with a post-hoc analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients were recruited. During CS, the level of 5 μm and 10 μm were significantly higher than the baseline period (P = 0.002). Procedures performed by trainees had a higher level of aerosols when compared to specialists (0.3 μm, P < 0.001; 0.5 μm and 0.7 μm, P < 0.001). The use of CO₂ and water immersion techniques had significantly lower aerosols generated when compared to air (CO₂ : 0.3, 0.5, and 0.7 μm: P < 0.001; water immersion: 0.3 μm: P = 0.048; 0.7 μm: P = 0.03). There were no significant increases in any particle sizes during the procedure at the endoscopists' and nurses' mouth. However, 8/117 (6.83%) particle count tracings showed a simultaneous surge of all particle sizes at the patient's anus and endoscopists' and nurses' level during rectal extubation.

CONCLUSION

Colonoscopy generates droplet nuclei especially during rectal extubation. The use of CO₂ and water immersion techniques may mitigate these risks.

Incidence and predisposing factors for de novo post-COVID-19 irritable bowel syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Postinfectious irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a known entity. We evaluated the incidence of post-COVID-19 IBS in patients discharged from the hospital and analyzed its correlation with the clinical and laboratory parameters, and treatment during the hospital stay.

METHODS

Three hundred three COVID-19 hospitalized patients without prior history of IBS were prospectively followed after their discharge and were evaluated as per Rome-IV criteria for IBS.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-eight patients were males (58.7%). The age range was 17-95 years (mean ± SD, 55.9 ± 15.8). A total of 194 (64%) had mild COVID-19, 74 (24.4%) had moderate COVID-19, whereas 35 (11.6%) had severe COVID-19 infection. Sixteen (5.3%) patients had concomitant GI symptoms during COVID-19 infection. IBS symptoms were found to be present in 32 (10.6%) patients, out of which 17 (53.13%) had diarrhea-predominant, 10 (31.25%) had constipation-predominant, and five (15.62%) had mixed-type IBS. Post-COVID-19 IBS was more common in the female sex (P < 0.001), concomitant GI symptoms with COVID-19 (P < 0.001), oxygen requirement (P = 0.015), deranged liver function tests at the time of admission (P = 0.002), high procalcitonin (P = 0.013), high C-reactive protein levels (P = 0.035); whereas negative correlation was found with remdesivir treatment (P = 0.047). After performing regression analysis, female sex (P < 0.001), oxygen requirement during hospital stay (P = 0.016), GI symptoms during COVID-19 infection (P < 0.001), and high procalcitonin levels (P = 0.017) were independently associated with post-COVID-19 IBS.

CONCLUSION

GI symptoms during active COVID-19 infection increase the chances of developing post-COVID-19 IBS. The risk of developing post-COVID-19 IBS increases in female patients, those requiring oxygen and having high procalcitonin levels during COVID-19 infection.

Use of expert consensus to develop a shared list of procedures with potential for aerosol generation during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the lack of agreement regarding the definition of aerosol-generating procedures and potential risk to healthcare personnel. We convened a group of Massachusetts healthcare epidemiologists to develop consensus through expert opinion in an area where broader guidance was lacking at the time.

Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Patients Co-Infected with SARS-CoV2 and Clostridioides difficile

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the treatment of Clostridioides Difficile (CD)-infected patients given the increasing number of co-infections with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this context, fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) shows promise in modulating the immune system’s function and alleviating the burdens associated with this condition. Methods: To achieve this goal, we performed a comparative, retrospective, single-center study on 86 patients (admitted between January 2020 and March 2022). We based our approach on specific inclusion criteria: 1. The study group included 46 co-infected patients (COVID-19 and CD) receiving antibiotics and FMT; 2. In the control group, 40 co-infected patients received antibiotics only. Our results showed no significant group differences in terms of gender, age, risk factors such as cardiovascular and neurological diseases, type 2 diabetes, and obesity (p > 0.05), or in pre-treatment inflammatory status, evaluated by white blood cell (WBC) count and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels. We report a significant decrease in inflammatory syndrome (CRP, WBC) in coinfected patients receiving FMT in addition to antibiotics (p < 0.05), with a lower relapse rate and mitigation of cramping and abdominal pain (91.3%). In addition, a higher level of fibrinogen, persistent moderate abdominal pain (82.5%), and a significantly higher CD infection relapse rate (42.5%) were recorded in co-infected patients treated only with antibiotics (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Our study provides new data to support the multiple benefits of FMT in the case of COVID-19 and CD co-infection by improving patients’ quality of life and inflammatory syndrome.

Biopsy channel of the endoscope as a potential source of infectious droplets during GI endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

During endoscopy, droplets with the potential to transmit infectious diseases are known to emanate from a patient's mouth and anus, but they may also be expelled from the biopsy channel of the endoscope. The main goal of our study was to quantify droplets emerging from the biopsy channel during clinical endoscopy.

METHODS

A novel light-scattering device was used to measure droplets emanating from the biopsy channel. An endoscopy model was created, and in vitro measurements were carried out during air insufflation, air and water suctioning, and the performance of biopsy sampling. Similar measurements were then made on patients undergoing endoscopy, with all measurements taking place over 2 days to minimize variation.

RESULTS

During in vitro testing, no droplets were observed at the biopsy channel during air insufflation or air and water suctioning. In 3 of 5 cases, droplets were observed during biopsy sampling, mostly when the forceps were being removed from the endoscope. In the 22 patients undergoing routine endoscopy, no droplets were observed during air insufflation and water suctioning. Droplets were detected in 1 of 11 patients during air suctioning. In 9 of 18 patients undergoing biopsy sampling and 5 of 6 patients undergoing snare polypectomies, droplets were observed at the biopsy channel, mostly when instruments were being removed from the endoscope.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the biopsy channel may be a source of infectious droplets, especially during the removal of instruments from the biopsy channel. When compared with droplets reported from the mouth and anus, these droplets were larger in size and therefore potentially more infectious.

Shielding device for endoscopic procedures during lower gastrointestinal endoscopy

Objectives

The coronavirus pandemic significantly impacted endoscopic practice. During lower gastrointestinal endoscopy, infectious substances disseminate; therefore, we developed an infection control device (STEP‐L) for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy and examined its usefulness.

Methods

STEP‐L wraps around the patient's buttocks and covers the endoscope. Using lower endoscopy training models, three endoscopists performed 18 colonoscopies with STEP‐L (group S) and without (group C). Endoscopic insertion time and pigmented areas of ​​gloves and diapers after the examination were compared between both groups.

Results

Insertion of the endoscope up to the cecum was possible in all 18 examinations. The insertion time to the cecum was 52.4 ± 19.0 s in group S and 53.9 ± 13.3 s in group C. The pigmented areas of the ​​gloves measured 39,108.0 ± 16,155.3 pixels in group C, but were significantly reduced to 2610.5 ± 4333.8 pixels in group S (p < 0.05). The pigmented areas of the diapers measured 2280.9 ± 3285.2 pixels in group C, but were significantly reduced to 138.0 ± 82.9 pixels in group S (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Using STEP‐L does not change the insertion time, and is technically feasible. STEP‐L significantly reduces the adhesion of virtual pollutants to the surroundings, suggesting that this device is useful for infection control during lower gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Aerosol and droplet generation in upper and lower GI endoscopy: whole procedure and event-based analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Aerosol-generating procedures have become an important healthcare issue during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic because the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus can be transmitted through aerosols. We aimed to characterize aerosol and droplet generation in GI endoscopy, where there is little evidence.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included 36 patients undergoing routine peroral gastroscopy (POG), 11 undergoing transnasal endoscopy (TNE), and 48 undergoing lower GI (LGI) endoscopy. Particle counters took measurements near the appropriate orifice (2 models were used with diameter ranges of .3-25 μm and 20-3000 μm). Quantitative analysis was performed by recording specific events and subtracting background particles.

RESULTS

POG produced 1.96 times the level of background particles (P < .001) and TNE produced 2.00 times (P < .001), but a direct comparison showed POG produced 2.00 times more particles than TNE. LGI procedures produced significant particle counts (P < .001) with 2.4 times greater production per procedure than POG but only .63 times production per minute. Events that were significant relative to the room background particle count were POG, with throat spray (150.0 times, P < .001), esophageal extubation (37.5 times, P < .001), and coughing or gagging (25.8 times, P < .01); TNE, with nasal spray (40.1 times, P < .001), nasal extubation (32.0 times, P < .01), and coughing or gagging (20.0, P < .01); and LGI procedures, with rectal intubation (9.9 times, P < .05), rectal extubation (27.2 times, P < .01), application of abdominal pressure (9.6 times, P < .05), and rectal insufflation or retroflexion (7.7 times, P < .01). These all produced particle counts larger than or comparable with volitional cough.

CONCLUSIONS

GI endoscopy performed through the mouth, nose, or rectum generates significant quantities of aerosols and droplets. Because the infectivity of procedures is not established, we therefore suggest adequate personal protective equipment is used for all GI endoscopy where there is a high population prevalence of COVID-19. Avoiding throat and nasal spray would significantly reduce particles generated from upper GI procedures.

External nasal dilator decreases N95 respirator-related respiratory effort and symptoms in gastrointestinal endoscopy unit staff

Background and study aims  N95-filtering facepiece respirators (FFR) use is associated with physiological changes and symptoms due to impaired nasal airflow and increased breathing resistance. We prospectively studied the effect of using an external nasal dilator (END) in gastroenterology laboratory (gastrointestinal lab) staff using N95FFR. Patients and methods  N95FFR qualitative saccharine fit testing was performed on study participants with and without an END. Prospective data collection and comparisons included: 1) survey of perceived symptoms and difficulty of performing one day of gastrointestinal procedures with N95FFR and 1 day of gastrointestinal procedures with END plus N95FFR in random sequence; and 2) vitals and respiratory belt plethysmography in ten gastroenterologists performing simulated colonoscopy while wearing a surgical mask (SM), N95FFR plus SM, END plus N95FFR plus SM for 20 minutes each in random sequence and rapid succession. Results  Twenty-nine of 31 participants passed the N95FFR and the END plus N95FFR fit test. Twenty-two participants (12 physicians; 11 males; mean age 44.1 years, range 31-61) performed 1 day of gastrointestinal procedures with an N95FFR and 1 day of gastrointestinal procedures with an END plus N95FFR. Significantly less difficulty with nasal breathing and severity of symptoms including breathing difficulty, headache, fatigue and frustration, occurred while using an END plus N95FFR. Respiratory plethysmography peak-to-trough measurement showed an increase during the N95FFR stage compared to the END plus N95FFR stage and the SM stage. Conclusions  N95FFR related respiratory changes and symptom development may be mitigated by END use.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Fecal Immunochemical Testing, Colonoscopy Services, and Colorectal Neoplasia Detection in a Large United States Community-based Population

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected clinical services globally, including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and diagnostic testing. We investigated the pandemic's impact on fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening, colonoscopy utilization, and colorectal neoplasia detection across 21 medical centers in a large integrated health care organization.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study in Kaiser Permanente Northern California patients ages 18 to 89 years in 2019 and 2020 and measured changes in the numbers of mailed, completed, and positive FITs; colonoscopies; and cases of colorectal neoplasia detected by colonoscopy in 2020 vs 2019.

RESULTS

FIT kit mailings ceased in mid-March through April 2020 but then rebounded and there was an 8.7% increase in kits mailed compared with 2019. With the later mailing of FIT kits, there were 9.0% fewer FITs completed and 10.1% fewer positive tests in 2020 vs 2019. Colonoscopy volumes declined 79.4% in April 2020 compared with April 2019 but recovered to near pre-pandemic volumes in September through December, resulting in a 26.9% decline in total colonoscopies performed in 2020. The number of patients diagnosed by colonoscopy with CRC and advanced adenoma declined by 8.7% and 26.9%, respectively, in 2020 vs 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

The pandemic led to fewer FIT screenings and colonoscopies in 2020 vs 2019; however, after the lifting of shelter-in-place orders, FIT screenings exceeded, and colonoscopy volumes nearly reached numbers from those same months in 2019. Overall, there was an 8.7% reduction in CRC cases diagnosed by colonoscopy in 2020. These data may help inform the development of strategies for CRC screening and diagnostic testing during future national emergencies.

The Impact of Patient Education Level on Split-Dose Colonoscopy Bowel Preparation for CRC Prevention

INTRODUCTION

AGA guidelines emphasize split-dose bowel preparation (BP) to ensure high-quality colonoscopy for the prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC). Split dose results in higher-quality preparation, but understanding instructions might be more difficult. Lower education levels may negatively influence BP quality. The confounding role of education level on BP quality was investigated.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of 60 patients given split-dose BP. Patients consented and were asked three Likert scale questions based on BP instructions before the procedure. Compliance was self-reported. BP adequacy and the number of adenomas were recorded. BP was characterized as adequate (excellent, good) or inadequate (fair, poor). Data was analyzed with chi-square, odds ratio, Mann-Whitney, and regression analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-one (52%) patients were high school graduates, 21 (38%) completed some college, and 6 (10%) were college graduates. College-educated patients had adequate BP (72%) more often than high school graduates (51%) (p = 0.02). Adenoma findings were not significantly different. The Likert scale mean ranks for patient understanding and reviewing of instructions were comparable between the two groups. Patient rating of scheduler explanations of the importance of following instructions was significantly better in the college group (mean ranks 2.59 and 1.83, respectively; p = 0.018).

DISCUSSION

Patient education level significantly affected the success of BP. Split BP can be more complex to comprehend, and instructions should consider patient education level. Specific intervention programs should be implemented to advise patients with less education that poor preparation may result in missed advanced neoplasias and subsequent procedures.

Current Applications of Telemedicine in Gastroenterology

Telemedicine generally refers to the use of technology to communicate with patients and provide health care from a distance. Advances in technology, specifically computers, cellphones, and other mobile devices, have facilitated healthcare providers' growing ability to virtually monitor and mentor patients. There has been a progressive expansion in the use of telemedicine in the field of gastroenterology (GI), which has been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this review, we discuss telemedicine-its history, various forms, and limitations-and its current applications in GI. Specifically, we focus on telemedicine in GI practice in general and specific applications, including the management of inflammatory bowel disease, celiac disease, and colorectal cancer surveillance and its use as an aid in endoscopic procedures.

Development of protective equipment for endoscopic treatment and surgery in otorhinolaryngology

Objective

The coronavirus disease pandemic has raised concerns regarding the transmission of infections to healthcare workers. We developed a new protective device to reduce the risk of aerosol diffusion and droplet infection among healthcare workers. Here, we report the results of a theoretical evaluation of the efficacy of this device.

Methods

We used suction-capable masks with and without rubber slits, sleeves for the insertion section of endoscopes and treatment tools, and a cover for the control section of the endoscope. To simulate droplet spread from patients, we created a droplet simulation model and an aerosol simulation model. The results with and without the devices attached and with and without the suction were compared.

Results

The droplet simulation model showed a 95% reduction in droplets with masks with rubber slits; furthermore, a reduction of 100% was observed when the insertion sleeve was used. Evaluation of aerosol simulation when suction was applied revealed an aerosol reduction of 98% and >99% with the use of the mask without rubber slits and with the combined use of the mask and insertion sleeve, respectively. The elimination of droplet emission upon instrument removal confirmed that the instrument sleeve prevented the diffusion of droplets. The elimination of droplets upon repeated pressing of the suction button confirmed that the cover prevented the diffusion of droplets.

Conclusion

We developed a device for infection control, in collaboration with a gastrointestinal endoscopist and Olympus Medical Systems Corporation, that was effective in reducing droplet and aerosol diffusion in this initial theoretical assessment.

Practical points that gastrointestinal fellows should know in management of COVID-19

Pandemics obligate providers to transform their clinical practice. An extensive effort has been put to find out feasible approaches for gastrointestinal diseases and also to manage coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related gastrointestinal conditions. Diarrhea, hepatitis, and pancreatitis can be seen in the COVID-19 course. Endoscopic procedures increase the risk of contamination for medical staff and patients despite precautions, therefore indications should be tailored to balance risks vs benefits. Furthermore, whether the immunosupression in inflammatory bowel diseases, liver transplantation, and autoimmune liver diseases increases COVID-19 related risks and how to modify immunosupression are topics of ongoing debate. This review aims to provide most up to date practical approaches that a gastrointestinal fellow should be aware on the problems and management of gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Evolution of International Pediatric Endoscopic Practice Changes During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic

OBJECTIVES

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has drastically altered endoscopic practices. We initially reported the international impact of COVID-19 on pediatric endoscopic practice. This follow-up study aimed to assess changes 7 months following the initial survey to delineate practice change patterns as the pandemic evolved.

METHODS

Pediatric gastroenterologists who responded to the initial survey were re-surveyed seven months later using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). The survey recorded information on changes in pediatric endoscopic practice patterns, including COVID-19 screening and testing processes and personal protective equipment (PPE) utilization. Additionally, endoscopists' risk tolerance of COVID-19 transmission was evaluated.

RESULTS

Seventy-five unique institutions from 21 countries completed surveys from the 145 initial responses (51.7% response rate). Procedural volumes increased at most institutions (70.7%) and most were performing previously postponed cases (90.7%). Ninety-seven percent of institutions were performing pre-endoscopy screening with 78.7% testing all patients. Many institutions (34.7%) have performed procedures on COVID-19 positive patients. There was significantly less PPE reuse (P  < 0.05) and fewer institutions recommending full PPE for all endoscopies (43.2% vs 59.2%, P = 0.013). Overall, pediatric endoscopists' risk tolerance of COVID-19 transmission is low.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first survey to highlight the evolution of pediatric endoscopic practices related to the COVID-19 pandemic, underscoring the need for ongoing pandemic-related guidance for pediatric endoscopic practice.

Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Clinical Diagnosis and Surgical Treatment-Overview

This article is an overview of guidelines for the clinical diagnosis and surgical treatment of predominantly colonic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). This overview describes the systematically and comprehensively multidisciplinary recommendations based on the updated principles of evidence-based literature to promote the adoption of best surgical practices and research as well as patient and specialized healthcare provider education. Colonic IBD represents idiopathic, chronic, inflammatory disorders encompassing Crohn's colitis (CC) and ulcerative colitis (UC), the two unsolved medical subtypes of this condition, which present similarity in their clinical and histopathological characteristics. The standard state-of-the-art classification diagnostic steps are disease evaluation and assessment according to the Montreal classification to enable explicit communication with professionals. The signs and symptoms on first presentation are mainly connected with the anatomical localization and severity of the disease and less with the resulting diagnosis "CC" or "UC". This can clinically and histologically be non-definitive to interpret to establish criteria and is classified as indeterminate colitis (IC). Conservative surgical intervention varies depending on the disease phenotype and accessible avenues. The World Gastroenterology Organizations has, for this reason, recommended guidelines for clinical diagnosis and management. Surgical intervention is indicated when conservative treatment is ineffective (refractory), during intractable gastrointestinal hemorrhage, in obstructive gastrointestinal luminal stenosis (due to fibrotic scar tissue), or in the case of abscesses, peritonitis, or complicated fistula formation. The risk of colitis-associated colorectal cancer is realizable in IBD patients before and after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Therefore, endoscopic surveillance strategies, aimed at the early detection of dysplasia, are recommended. During the COVID-19 pandemic, IBD patients continued to be admitted for IBD-related surgical interventions. Virtual and phone call follow-ups reinforcing the continuity of care are recommended. There is a need for special guidelines that explore solutions to the groundwork gap in terms of access limitations to IBD care in developing countries, and the irregular representation of socioeconomic stratification needs a strategic plan for how to address this serious emerging challenge in the global pandemic.

Coronavirus Disease Transmission Prevented in an Endoscopy Unit with Universal Protective Measures and No Systematic Preprocedural Testing

Background and aims: Even after two years of pandemic, there are still uncertainties on how to proceed when we schedule endoscopic procedures. During the COVID-19 pandemic, some scientific societies recommended universal preprocedural testing for all patients. However, other societies recommended against and considered enough to maintain strict infection control strategies. Our aim was to evaluate this approach in order to see if it was safe for both patients and healthcare workers to proceed with the endoscopies without performing a systematic PCR on all patients. Methods: Retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing endoscopy without preprocedural COVID testing at our center from March 2020 to May 2021. PCR tests performed in the patients receiving an endoscopic procedure were analyzed, and patients who tested positive between 14 days before and after the endoscopic procedure were selected. The registry of the endoscopy unit members participating in these procedures was also analyzed. Results: A total of 10,132 procedures were performed in the unit with 26 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. Nineteen of these procedures were performed in patients with unknown SARS-CoV-2 carrier status. In 23 (88.5%) cases, transmission occurred through social or familial contact, and in 3 (11.5%), transmission occurred in the hospital. Four health care workers became infected during this period and none of them were related to the endoscopic procedures performed in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 positive testing in asymptomatic ambulatory patients is rare and the adequate use of individual protective measures emerges as the main way to control the spread of COVID-19 infection in endoscopy centers.

Electroconvulsive Therapy in Canada During the First Wave of COVID-19: Results of the "What Happened" National Survey

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the provision of essential and potentially life-saving procedural treatments such as electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). We surveyed ECT providers across Canada to understand how the first wave of the pandemic affected ECT delivery between mid-March 2020 and mid-May 2020.

METHODS

The survey was administered to ECT team members and decision makers at 107 Canadian health care centers with a focus on 5 domains: operations, decision-making, hospital resources, ECT procedure, and patient impact. Responses were obtained from 72 institutions, and collected answers were used to derive representative responses reflecting the situation at each ECT center. For specific domains, responses were split into 2 databases representing the perspective of psychiatrists (n = 67 centers) and anesthesiologists (n = 24 centers).

RESULTS

Provision of ECT decreased in 64% centers and was completely suspended in 27% of centers after the onset of the pandemic. Outpatient and maintenance ECT were more affected than inpatient and acute ECT. Programs reported a high level of collaboration between psychiatry and hospital leadership (59%) but a limited input from clinical ethicists (18%). Decisions were mostly made ad hoc leading to variability across institutions in adopted resource allocation, physical location of ECT delivery, and triaging frameworks. The majority of centers considered ECT to be aerosol-generating and incorporated changes to airway management.

CONCLUSIONS

Electroconvulsive therapy services in Canada were markedly disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The variability in decision-making across centers warrants the development of a rational approach toward offering ECT in pandemic contexts.

New endoscopic capsule vs upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in preoperative work-up of obese candidate for bariatric surgery: Relevance of a pilot study in the COVID-19 era

Background and study aims  Obesity represents a major health concern; bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment reducing and maintaining weight loss. The role of a routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) prior bariatric surgery is still debated. Moreover, in this scenario of COVID-19 pandemic, EGD is even more questionable due to the procedural risk of viral transmission. A new model of video-endoscopic capsule (VEC) recently has been introduced as a good alternative to the EGD. The aim of this study was to determine if this new capsule is an adequate diagnostic alternative to EGD in the work-up of patients selected for bariatric surgery, particularly in the setting of COVID-19. Patients and methods  From January to November 2020, 27 patients selected for bariatric surgery were enrolled in this pilot study to assess for noninferiority of VEC compared to EGD in detection of upper gastrointestinal disease. Results  VEC had sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values in identification of significant lesions of 91.3 %, 83.33 %, 98.01 %, and 51.57 %, respectively, compared with EGD as the standard criterion. The accuracy was 90.51 % (95 % CI, 73.75 %-98.18 %) and the chi-square statistic is 0.1153 ( P  = 0.73). Conclusions  Our report confirms the diagnostic noninferiority of VEC in preoperative work-up of patients selected for bariatric surgery, compared to EGD. This is very important, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, given the high risk of contamination with EGD. Larger multicenter studies are required to confirm our preliminary results.

The impact of face shields on the quality of gastrointestinal endoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic, with healthcare workers at a high risk of exposure. During this pandemic, endoscopists must wear personal protective equipment (PPE), including face shields, to prevent COVID-19 transmission; however, few studies have reported the impact of face shields on the quality of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. We aimed to determine whether the use of PPE, including face shields, affected the quality of GI endoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

The medical records of patients who had undergone screening or surveillance colonoscopy and gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) at Dong-A University Hospital between June 2020 and March 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Endoscopists wore isolation gowns, disposable gloves, and KF94 masks from June 2020 to October 2020. From November 2020, endoscopists also wore face shields. We compared GI endoscopy quality indicators between the first five months (no face shields) and the second five months (with face shields). In the non-face shield and face shield groups, we calculated the overall adenoma detection rates (ADRs), polyp detection rate (PDR), sessile serrated lesion detection rate (SSLDR), advanced neoplasia detection rate (ANDR), complete resection rate (CRR), number of polyps and/or adenomas per colonoscopy, and gastric ESD procedure time.

Results

In total, 1359 study patients had undergone screening or surveillance colonoscopy (face shield group, n = 679; non-face shield group, n = 680). No statistically significant between-group differences were observed (PDR, 49.04 vs. 52.50%, p = 0.202; ADR, 38.59 vs. 38.97%, p = 0.884; SSPDR, 1.91 vs. 1.32%, p = 0.388; ANDR, 3.98 vs. 3.97%, p = 0.991, respectively). No difference was found in colonoscopy quality indicators between patients examined by experienced and trainee endoscopists with and without face shields. Of 144 study patients who had undergone gastric ESD for gastric neoplasms, there were 72 patients in each group. No statistically significant differences were found in the CRR (94.44 vs 93.05%, p = 1.000) and procedure times (19.22 ± 9.33 vs. 19.03 ± 11.49, p = 0.911).

Conclusions

Wearing face shields during the COVID-19 pandemic did not affect the quality indicators for GI endoscopy.