Endoscopy Units and the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreak: A Multicenter Experience From Italy

Recent advances in COVID-19-induced liver injury: causes, diagnosis, and management

Since the start of the pandemic, considerable advancements have been made in our understanding of the effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the associated COVID-19 on the hepatic system. There is a broad range of clinical symptoms for COVID-19. It affects multiple systems and has a dominant lung illness depending on complications. The progression of COVID-19 in people with pre-existing chronic liver disease (CLD) has also been studied in large multinational groups. Notably, SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with a higher risk of hepatic decompensation and death in patients with cirrhosis. In this review, the source, composition, mechanisms, transmission characteristics, clinical characteristics, therapy, and prevention of SARS-CoV-2 were clarified and discussed, as well as the evolution and variations of the virus. This review briefly discusses the causes and effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with CLD. As part of COVID-19, In addition, we assess the potential of liver biochemistry as a diagnostic tool examine the data on direct viral infection of liver cells, and investigate potential pathways driving SARS-CoV-2-related liver damage. Finally, we explore how the pandemic has had a significant impact on patient behaviors and hepatology services, which may increase the prevalence and severity of liver disease in the future. The topics encompassed in this review encompass the intricate relationships between SARS-CoV-2, liver health, and broader health management strategies, providing valuable insights for both current clinical practice and future research directions.

Development and status quo of digestive endoscopy in China: An analysis based on the national census in 2013 and 2020

Background and Objectives

Technique and practice of digestive endoscopy are undergoing speedy development all over the world. This study aimed to evaluate its status quo and development in China.

Methods

All hospitals performing digestive endoscopy in mainland China participated in the national census in 2013 and 2020. Retrospective data of hospitals, endoscopists, volumes, and qualities were collected via an online structured questionnaire, and its accuracy and rationality were verified by logical tests and manual reviews. Data from other countries were used to compare with that of China.

Results

From 2012 to 2019, the number of hospitals performing digestive endoscopy increased from 6,128 to 7,470 (1.22-fold), in which primary healthcare played a minor role. The median hospitals per 100,000 inhabitants per provincial region increased from 0.49 (IQR, 0.39-0.57) to 0.55 (IQR, 0.49-0.63). The endoscopists increased from 26,203 to 39,638 (1.51-fold), but their average workload even expanded. Overall volume increased from 28.8 million to 44.5 million (1.55-fold), and most types of endoscopic procedures recorded a high growth rate. Contrastingly, the specific utilization rates were low and paled in comparison with some developed countries. Nationwide, regional utilization rates showed a significant correlation with GDP per capita (P <0.001). Overall qualities of digestive endoscopy were excellent, but certain results of quality indicators posed a huge challenge, such as the detection rates of adenoma and early cancers.

Conclusions

Impressive progress has been made in digestive endoscopy with rapidly expanding economy in China. However, primary healthcare, utilization rates, and income-related inequality of regional services were needed to be improved to promote public health better.

How we can improve the appropriateness of ambulatory gastrointestinal endoscopy: the lesson of the COVID-19 outbreak

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has significantly modified hospital and outpatient activities.

AIMS

To assess the pandemic's impact on the appropriateness of outpatient gastrointestinal (G.I.) endoscopy in a southern Italy Region.

METHODS

Between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2022, we compared the number, the type of activities, and the appropriateness of the G.I. endoscopy procedures in the four territorial gastroenterology and digestive endoscopy services of the Apulia region.

RESULTS

In 2019, 11 173 outpatient procedures were provided, which dropped by about 44% (P < 0.05) during 2020. The endoscopic activity was slightly reduced during 2020 (-18.77%), while every other activity dropped significantly. During 2021-2022, the overall activities slightly increased but remained below the number of activities provided before the pandemic (P < 0.05). However, the endoscopic activity increased by +6.86% from 2019 to 2022, mainly due to more colonoscopies. During the 4 years analysed, the overall appropriateness rate of the endoscopic examinations increased during 2020 (2019: 67%; 2020: 81%) while dropping again in the following years (2021: 75%; 2022; 69%).

CONCLUSION

The appropriateness of the G.I. endoscopic procedures in the territorial gastroenterology services in the Apulia Region has improved during the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, dropping again in the following years. Overall, the appropriateness of endoscopic procedures remains suboptimal; thus, educational activities are needed to improve the appropriateness rate to optimise the limited resources.

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.

Biodegradable biliopancreatic stents could help conserve health care resources during the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Considering limited resources for follow-up due to COVID-19, we used biodegradable stents (BPBS) for a range of biliopancreatic diseases.

AIMS

This observational multicenter study aimed to evaluate technical safety and give first insights into clinical utility.

METHODS

Technical success, clinical success, and necessity of follow-up visits for BPBS placed at three Austrian tertiary care hospitals between April 2020 and January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

63 stents were deployed in 60 patients. Main indications were prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP; n = 30/63; 48%) and bridging of prolonged waiting times to cholecystectomy (n = 21/63; 33%). Median time to surgery was 47 days (range: 136 days). The technical success rate was 94% (n = 59/63; 95% CI [0.84, 0.98]). Technical difficulties primarily arose with dislocations. Clinical success was achieved in 90% (n = 57/63; 95% CI [0.80, 0.96]). Clinical failure despite successful deployment was caused by papillary bleeding (1 patient) and cholestasis (1 patient). Both required reinterventions. No follow-up visits were needed in 97% of cases (n = 57/59; 95% CI [0.88, 1.00]).

CONCLUSION

Biodegradable stents could help conserve health care resources without compromising treatment standards for PEP prophylaxis, which is particularly valuable in times of restricted resources. First insights into feasibility as bridging to cholecystectomy indicate a favorable safety profile.

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.

Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic and Post-Vaccination Period on Gastroenterology Practice in Turkey

BACKGROUND

The sudden and intense burden due to the novel coronavirus (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic has changed the priority of many health services. The highly contagious new variants and vaccination services have greatly impacted the daily practice of gastroenterologists. In the present study, we tried to evaluate the change in the daily practice of Turkish gastroenterologists in the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and the post-vaccination periods.

METHODS

A questionnaire was prepared using Google forms and sent online to 214 gastroenterologists registered with the Turkish Gastroenterology Association.

RESULTS

Approximately half of the gastroenterologists moved their endoscopy unit or gastroenterology clinic to another location in the hospital during the pandemic and about one-third of the endoscopy units were completely closed. About 56% of the respondents reported the interruption of endoscopic procedures and inpatient services. In total, 85% of gastroenterologists thought that follow-up and treatment of chronic patients were disrupted due to patients obtaining their medicine directly from pharmacies. After the first case in Turkey, 74% of gastroenterologists worked in coronavirus disease 2019 patient care services, 28% of gastroenterologists were infected with coronavirus disease 2019, and 3% believed they had a cross-infected patient(s). A total of 78% of gastroenterologists reported that patient management became difficult due to the change in the priority of other departments, and 60% of gastroenterologists confirmed that they experienced a decrease in income. In the post-vaccination period, 70% of gastroenterologists returned to their pre-pandemic working schedule and 31% noticed an increase in endoscopic cancer detection.

CONCLUSION

Prolongation of the pandemic has seriously damaged the practice of gastroenterology and multidisciplinary patient management.

Effect of COVID-19 on gastrointestinal endoscopy practice: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Since the emergence of the novel corona virus (SARS-Cov-2) in the late 2019 and not only the endoscopy practice and training but also the health care systems around the globe suffers. This systematic review focused the impact of Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19) on the endoscopy practice.

METHODS

A web search of different databases combining different search terms describing the endoscopy practice and the COVID-19 pandemic was done. Articles were screened for selection of relevant articles in two steps: title and abstract step and full-text screening step, by two independent reviewers and any debate was solved by a third reviewer.

RESULTS

Final studies included in qualitative synthesis were 47. The data shown in the relevant articles were evident for marked reduction in the volume of endoscopy, marked affection of colorectal cancer screening, impairments in the workflow, deficiency in personal protective equipment (PPE) and increased likelihood of catching the infection among both the staff and the patients.

CONCLUSION

The main outcomes from this review are rescheduling of endoscopy procedures to be suitable with the situation of COVID-19 pandemic in each Country. Also, the endorsement of the importance of PPE use for health care workers and screening of COVID-19 infection pre-procedure.Key messagesThe data focussing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and COVID-19 emerged from different areas around the globe. The data presented on the published studies were heterogeneous. However, there were remarkable reductions in the volume of GI endoscopy worldwideStaff reallocation added a burden to endoscopy practiceThere was a real risk for COVID-19 spread among both the staff and the patients.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal and gastric cancer diagnosis, disease stage and mortality

Background

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, a significant decline in endoscopic procedures has been observed.

Aims

We investigated the change of incidence, clinical characteristics, disease stage and mortality of patients with gastric cancer (GC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosed in 2020 compared to the pre-pandemic year 2019.

Methods

Demographic, clinical and laboratory data on all patients diagnosed with GC or CRC at the Soroka University Medical Center were retrospectively collected and compared. Number of cases, time of diagnosis, clinical presentation, staging at diagnosis and mortality rates were compared.

Results

Two hundred sixteen patients were diagnosed with CRC in 2019, whereas only 162 were diagnosed in 2020 (25% reduction), while 36 GC diagnoses were made in 2019 compared to 24 in 2020 (33% reduction). The age-adjusted incidence was calculated to be 24.28 for CRC and 5.0 for GC in 2020 compared to 29.93 and 5.32 in 2019, respectively. CRC patients had a significantly lower rate of rectal bleeding as their presenting symptom in 2020 compared with 2019, 8.1 vs. 19% (p = 0.003), but higher rate of diarrhea as their presenting symptom, 4.3 vs. 1% (p = 0.044). No significant differences regarding other presenting symptoms, comorbidities, surgery or mortality rates were found between the groups diagnosed in 2019 or 2020.

Conclusion

A decrease in GC and CRC incidence was observed during the year 2020; lower rate of rectal bleeding and higher rate of diarrhea as presenting symptoms were noted in 2020, but no significant difference was found regarding other presenting symptoms, disease stage, surgery or mortality.

COVID-19 and the Pancreas: A Narrative Review

The outbreak of COVID-19, initially developed in China in early December 2019, has rapidly spread to other countries and represents a public health emergency of international concern. COVID-19 has caused great concern about respiratory symptoms, but it is worth noting that it can also affect the gastrointestinal tract. However, the data on pancreatic involvement during SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited. The prevalence and severity of pancreatic damage and acute pancreatitis, as well as its pathophysiology, are still under debate. Moreover, the possible implication of pancreatic damage as an apparent adverse effect of COVID-19 therapies or vaccines are issues that need to be addressed. Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic has generated delays and organizational consequences for pancreatic surgery, an element that represent indirect damage from COVID-19. This narrative review aims to summarize and analyze all the aspects of pancreatic involvement in COVID-19 patients, trying to establish the possible underlying mechanisms and scientific evidence supporting the association between COVID-19 and pancreatic disease.

How the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the colorectal cancer screening in Italy: A minireview

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused detrimental effects on many aspects of healthcare practice. Screening programs for the commonest malignancies, namely colorectal cancer (CRC), breast cancer and cervical cancer have been discontinued or interrupted since the beginning of restriction measures aimed to limit transmission of the new coronavirus infection. Robust evidence exists in favour of the role of screening campaigns in reducing mortality from CRC. In fact, the majority of pre-malignant lesions of the colon and rectum can be diagnosed with colonoscopy and treated by endoscopic or surgical resection. Besides, colonoscopy screening allows the diagnosis of CRCs in their pre-clinical stage. Italy was one of the first European countries where a high level of COVID-19 infections and deaths was observed, and one of the first where lockdowns and strict measures were adopted to reduce the risk of COVID-19 diffusion among the population. A systematic review of the literature was performed, including the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Sciences, and Reference Citation Analysis databases, with the aim of critically evaluating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on CRC screening in Italy. We found that reduction of CRC screening activity surpassed 50% in most endoscopic units, with almost 600000 fewer CRC screening exams conducted in the first 5 mo of 2020 vs the same period of 2019. While the consequences of the discontinuation of endoscopy screening for the prognosis and mortality of CRC will be evident in the next few years, recent data confirm that CRC is currently treated at a more advanced stage than in the pre-COVID-19 era. Since delays in CRC prevention and early diagnosis may translate to increased CRC-specific mortality, world healthcare systems should adopt strategies to maintain the regularity of CRC screening during subsequent peaks of the COVID-19 pandemic, or future events that might hamper screening programs.

Appropriateness of routine pre-endoscopic SARS-CoV-2 screening with RT-PCR in asymptomatic individuals and its impact on delayed diagnosis

Aims

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusions

Survey of the Impact of COVID-19 on Chronic Liver Disease Patient Care Experiences and Outcomes

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has a secondary impact on the health of patients with chronic liver disease (CLD). Our objective was to study this impact on care provision, telemedicine, and health behaviours in CLD patients.

Methods

CLD patients of an urban gastroenterology clinic who attended a telemedicine appointment between March 17, 2020 and September 17, 2020, completed an online survey on care delays, health behaviours, and experience with telemedicine. Chart review was conducted in 400 randomly selected patients: 200 charts from during the pandemic were compared to 200 charts the previous year. Data were extracted for clinicodemographic variables, laboratory investigations, and clinical outcomes.

Results

Of 399 patients invited to participate, 135 (34%) completed the online survey. Fifty (39%) patients reported 83 care delays due to the COVID-19 pandemic, with the majority (71%) of delays persisting beyond 2 months. Ninety-five (75%) patients were satisfied with telemedicine appointments. There was a longer delay between lab work and appointments in patients seen during the pandemic compared to 2019 (P = 0.01). Compared to the year prior, during the COVID pandemic, there was a similar number of cases of cirrhosis decompensation (n = 26, 13% versus n = 22, 11%) and hospitalization (n = 12, 6% versus n = 5, 3%).

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to care delays for CLD outpatients, with most delays on the scale of months. These patient-reported experiences and clinical observations can direct optimization of CLD care as effects from the pandemic evolve.

Recent advances in clinical practice: management of inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised considerable concerns that patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), particularly those treated with immunosuppressive therapies, may have an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition, develop worse outcomes following COVID-19, and have suboptimal vaccine response compared with the general population. In this review, we summarise data on the risk of COVID-19 and associated outcomes, and latest guidance on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with IBD. Emerging evidence suggests that commonly used medications for IBD, such as corticosteroids but not biologicals, were associated with adverse outcomes to COVID-19. There has been no increased risk of de novo, or delayed, IBD diagnoses, however, an overall decrease in endoscopy procedures has led to a rise in the number of missed endoscopic-detected cancers during the pandemic. The impact of IBD medication on vaccine response has been a research priority recently. Data suggest that patients with IBD treated with antitumour necrosis factor (TNF) medications had attenuated humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and more rapid antibody decay, compared with non-anti-TNF-treated patients. Reassuringly, rates of breakthrough infections and hospitalisations in all patients who received vaccines, irrespective of IBD treatment, remained low. International guidelines recommend that all patients with IBD treated with immunosuppressive therapies should receive, at any point during their treatment cycle, three primary doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines with a further booster dose as soon as possible. Future research should focus on our understanding of the rate of antibody decay in biological-treated patients, which patients require additional doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, the long-term risks of COVID-19 on IBD disease course and activity, and the potential risk of long COVID-19 in patients with IBD.

COVID-19 Impact on Australian Patients with Substance Use Disorders: Emergency Department Admissions in Western Sydney before Vaccine Roll Out

Background: In this study, we determined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Western Sydney patients with substance use disorders (SUD) by comparing emergency department (ED) admission rates before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and before the rollout of COVID-19 vaccination. Methods: ED admission data for patients with SUD were retrieved from the local electronic medical record (eMR) on the hospital central database. ED data collected from 25 January to 25 July 2019 (before the COVID-19 pandemic) were compared with data from 25 January to 25 July 2020 (early pandemic). ED admission reasons were categorised based on the presenting complaints and ED diagnoses. Results: Despite an overall reduction in ED admissions during the early pandemic, compared to the pre-pandemic period, admissions for patients with SUD increased significantly (1.7% to 3.4%, p < 0.01). ED admission rates related to infection (0.05% to 0.12%, p < 0.01), local infection (0.02% to 0.05%, p < 0.01), trauma (0.06% to 0.12%, p < 0.01), alcohol (0.01% to 0.03%, p < 0.05), and other issues (0.06% to 0.10%, p < 0.05) increased significantly among Indigenous patients with SUD. ED admission rates related to drugs (0.12% to 0.39%, p < 0.01), infection (0.21% to 0.34%, p < 0.01), local infection (0.07% to 0.18%, p < 0.01), gastrointestinal (0.15% to 0.23%, p < 0.05), trauma (0.14% to 0.25%, p < 0.01), alcohol (0.36% to 0.74%, p < 0.01), and ‘other’ issues (0.47% to 0.91%, p < 0.01) increased significantly among non-Indigenous patients with SUD. Four cases of COVID-19 were reported among these patients. Conclusions: There was an increase in ED admissions for patients with SUD in the initial six months of the COVID-19 pandemic (before vaccine rollout), mainly for drugs, systemic infection, local infection, trauma, and alcohol-related reasons. Now that most people in New South Wales have been vaccinated against COVID-19, a further study is needed to quantify the effect of the pandemic on patients with SUD in the post-vaccine era.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and jejunostomy: Indications and techniques

Nutritional support is essential in patients who have a limited capability to maintain their body weight. Therefore, oral feeding is the main approach for such patients. When physiological nutrition is not possible, positioning of a nasogastric, nasojejunal tube, or other percutaneous devices may be feasible alternatives. Creating a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a suitable option to be evaluated for patients that need nutritional support for more than 4 wk. Many diseases require nutritional support by PEG, with neurological, oncological, and catabolic diseases being the most common. PEG can be performed endoscopically by various techniques, radiologically or surgically, with different outcomes and related adverse events (AEs). Moreover, some patients that need a PEG placement are fragile and are unable to express their will or sign a written informed consent. These conditions highlight many ethical problems that become difficult to manage as treatment progresses. The aim of this manuscript is to review all current endoscopic techniques for percutaneous access, their indications, postprocedural follow-up, and AEs.

Outcomes for upper gastrointestinal bleeding during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Toronto area

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Changes to endoscopy service availability during the COVID-19 pandemic may have affected management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The aim of this study was to describe the impact of the pandemic on UGIB outcomes in the Toronto area in Canada.

METHODS

We described all adults admitted to general medicine wards or intensive care units at six hospitals in Toronto and Mississauga, Canada, with UGIB during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 1 to June 30, 2020) and compared them with a historical cohort (March 1 to June 30, 2018 and 2019). We compared clinical outcomes (in-hospital mortality, length of stay, 30-day readmission, intensive care utilization, receipt of endoscopy, persistent bleeding, receipt of second endoscopy, and need for angiographic or surgical intervention) using multivariable regression models, controlling for demographics, comorbidities, and severity of clinical presentation.

RESULTS

There were 82.5 and 215.5 admissions per month for UGIB during the COVID-19 and control periods, respectively. There were no baseline differences between groups for demographic characteristics, comorbidities, or severity of bleeding. Patients in the COVID-19 group did not have significantly different unadjusted (3.9% vs 4.2%, P = 0.983) or adjusted mortality (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.25-1.48, P = 0.322). Patients in COVID-19 group were less likely to receive endoscopy for UGIB in the unadjusted (61.8% vs 71.0%, P = 0.003) and adjusted (adjusted OR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.49-0.84, P < 0.01) models. There were no differences between groups for other secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

While patients admitted for UGIB during the first wave of the pandemic were less likely to receive endoscopy, this had no impact on mortality or any secondary outcomes.

Analysis of the effects of the first and second/third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic on an Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Unit in a German 'hotspot' area: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Since December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has posed a pandemic threat to global health. We are now in the fourth wave of this pandemic. As the pandemic developed, the requirements and therapeutic endoscopic procedures for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients underwent changes.

METHODS

Analysis of implications for an endoscopy unit during the first and second/third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic with a focus on COVID-19-related process changing. Addressed are number of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients and endoscopic examinations performed in patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the various waves, adherence to scheduled examinations, rotation of staff to COVID-dedicated structures and, finally, impact of vaccination on infection rate among endoscopic staff.

RESULTS

During the first wave, 10 SARS-CoV-2-positive in-house patients underwent a total of 22 gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. During the second and third waves, 59 GI endoscopies were performed in 38 patients. While in the first wave, GI bleeding was the main indication for endoscopy (82%), in the second and third waves the main indication for endoscopy was endoscopic insertion of deep feeding tubes (78%; p < 0.001). During the first wave, 5 (17%) of 29 Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Unit (IEU) staff members were moved to designated COVID wards, which was not necessary during the following waves. Lack of protective clothing was critical during the first wave, but not in the later waves. Screening tests for patients and staff were widely available after the first wave, and IEU staff was vaccinated during the second wave.

CONCLUSION

Strategies to ensure safe endoscopies with respect to preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from patients to staff were effective. Organizational adjustments allowed the routine program to continue unaffected. Indications for GI endoscopies changed over time: during the first wave, GI endoscopies were performed for life-threatening indications, whereas later supportive procedures were the main indication.

Clinical and Endoscopic Outcomes in Coronavirus Disease-2019 Patients With Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Over 404 million people worldwide have been infected with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), 145 million in the United States (77 million) and Europe (151 million) alone (as of February 10, 2022). This paper aims to analyze data from studies reporting gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and/or endoscopic findings in COVID-19 patients in Western countries.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of articles on confirmed COVID-19 cases with GIB in Western countries published in PubMed and Google Scholar databases from June 20, 2020, to July 10, 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies reporting GIB and/or endoscopic findings in 808 COVID-19 patients in Western countries were collected and analyzed. Outcomes and comorbidities were compared with 18,179 non-GIB COVID-19 patients from Italy and the United States. As per our study findings, the overall incidence of GIB in COVID-19 patients was found to be 0.06%. When compared to the non-GIB cohort, the death rate was significantly high in COVID-19 patients with GIB (16.4% vs 25.4%, P < .001, respectively). Endoscopic treatment was rarely necessary, and blood transfusion was the most common GIB treatment. The most common presentation in GIB patients is melena (n = 117, 47.5%). Peptic, esophageal, and rectal ulcers were the most common endoscopic findings in upper (48.4%) and lower (36.4%) endoscopies. The GIB cohort had worse outcomes and higher incidence of hypertension (61.1%), liver disease (11.2%), and cancer (13.6%) than the non-GIB cohort. Death was strongly associated with hypertension (P < .001, r = 0.814), hematochezia (P < .001, r = 0.646), and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (P < .001, r = 0.591) in COVID-19 patients with GIB.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the incidence of GIB in COVID-19 patients is similar to that estimated in the overall population, with melena being the most common presentation. The common endoscopic findings in GIB COVID-19 patients were ulcers, esophagitis, gastritis, and colitis. Patients with GIB were more prone to death than non-GIB COVID-19 patients.

Changes in the Proportion of Gastrointestinal Emergency Endoscopy and Peptic Ulcer Disease During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Local Retrospective Observational Study From Vietnam

Objectives

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted the practice of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy units and may increase the risk of digestive disorders. We described the situational changes in GI endoscopy and peptic ulcer disease (PUD) proportion during COVID-19 in Vietnam and examined the associated factors.

Methods

A retrospective ecological study was conducted on data of Hanoi Medical University Hospital, Vietnam. The number of upper GI endoscopy and the proportion of GI emergency endoscopy and PUD were compared between 2019 and 2020 by month (January to June). Log-binomial regression was used to explore associated factors of GI emergency endoscopy and PUD.

Results

The number of endoscopies decreased remarkably during the nationwide social distancing in April 2020. Compared to April 2019, the proportion in April 2020 of both GI emergency endoscopy [4.1 vs. 9.8%, proportion ratio (PR) 2.39, 95% CI 2, 2.87], and PUD [13.9 vs. 15.8%; PR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01, 1.29] was significantly higher. In log-binomial models, the proportion of GI emergency endoscopy was higher in April 2020 compared to April 2019 (adjusted PR, 2.41; 95% CI, 2.01, 2.88). Male sex and age of ≥50 years were associated with an increased PUD and GI emergency conditions.

Conclusion

The proportion of both GI emergency endoscopy and PUD was significantly higher during the time of the state of emergency due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 when compared to 2019 at the same health facility in Vietnam. The findings suggest that healthcare delivery reforms during the era of an emerging pandemic are required to reduce digestive disorders, in particular, and chronic diseases in general.

National survey regarding the timing of endoscopic procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, several questions have arisen about which endoscopic procedures (EPs) must be performed and which ones can be postponed. The aim of this study was to conduct a nationwide survey regarding the appropriate timing of EPs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This prospective study was performed through a nationwide electronic survey. The survey consisted of 15 questions divided into three sections. The first evaluated the agreement for EPs classified as "time sensitive" and "not time sensitive". Two other sections assessed "high-priority" and "low-priority" scenarios. Agreement was considered when > 75% of respondents answered a question in the same direction.

RESULTS

The response rate was 27.2% (214/784). Among the respondents, agreement for the need to perform EP in < 72 h was only reached for variceal bleeding (93.4%). Dysphagia with alarm symptoms was the scenario in which the highest percentage of physicians (95.9%) agreed that an EP needed to be performed within a month. Less than 30% of endoscopists would perform an EP within the first 72 h for patients with mild cholangitis, non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding without hemodynamic instability, or severe anaemia without overt bleeding. In time-sensitive clinical scenarios suggestive of benign disease, none of the scenarios reached agreement in any sense. Among the time-sensitive clinical scenarios suggestive of malignancy, > 90% of the surveyed respondents considered that EP could not be postponed for > 8 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no consensus among endoscopists about the timing of EPs in patients with pathologies considered time sensitive or in those with high-priority pathologies. Agreement was only reached in five (17%) of the evaluated clinical scenarios.

Impact of the COVID-19 Outbreak on Anesthesiologist Assistance for Endoscopic Procedures

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has modified the activities of endoscopy units worldwide. Herein, we investigated the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on anesthesiologist assistance for endoscopic procedures in Lombardy, Italy.

METHODS

A questionnaire concerning anesthesiologist assistance provided from October 26 to December 6, 2020, in comparison with the same period in 2019, was sent to endoscopic units in Lombardy.

RESULTS

Approximately 54% (34/63) of the units responded. A reduction in the number of all endoscopies (-33.5%; 18792 in 2020 vs. 28264 in 2019) and anesthesiologist-assisted endoscopies (-15.3%; 2652 in 2020 vs. 3132 in 2019) was reported. A greater reduction in anesthesiologist assistance was observed in government community units (-29.5%) than in academic (-14%) and private community units (-4.6%). Among all units, 85% reported a reduction in anesthesiologist assistance; 65% observed a delay/cancellation of procedures; 59%, a restricted patient selection; 17%, the need to transfer some patients to other hospitals; and 32%, a related worsening of procedure quality.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic compromised the anesthesiologist assistance for endoscopic procedures in Lombardy, which worsened the procedure quality mainly in government community units. The COVID-19 "stress test" suggests a more balanced allocation of anesthesiologic resources in the future.

An Unprecedented Challenge: The North Italian Gastroenterologist Response to COVID-19

Background: COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly changed the activities and daily clinical scenarios, subverting organizational requirements of our Gastroenterology Units. AIM: to evaluate the clinical needs and outcomes of the gastroenterological ward metamorphosis during the COVID-19 outbreaks in a high incidence scenario. Methods: we compared the pertinence of gastroenterological hospitalization, modality of access, mortality rate, days of hospitalization, diagnostic and interventional procedures, age, Charlson comorbidity index, and frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients and healthcare personnel across the first and the second COVID-19 outbreaks in a COVID-free gastroenterological ward in the metropolitan area of Milan, that was hit first and hardest during the first COVID-19 outbreak since March 2020. Results: pertinence of gastroenterological hospitalization decreased both during the first and, to a lesser degree, the second SARS-CoV2 waves as compared to the pre-COVID era (43.6, 85.4, and 96.2%, respectively), as occurred to the admissions from domicile, while age, comorbidities, length of stay and mortality increased. Endoscopic and interventional radiology procedures declined only during the first wave. Hospitalized patients resulted positive to a SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab in 10.2% of cases during the first COVID-19 outbreak after a median of 7 days since admission (range 1–15 days) and only 1 out of 318 patients during the second wave (6 days after admission). During the first wave, 19.5% of healthcare workers tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Conclusions: a sudden metamorphosis of the gastroenterological ward was observed during the first COVID-19 outbreak with a marked reduction in the gastroenterological pertinence at the admission, together with an increase in patients’ age and multidisciplinary complexity, hospital stays, and mortality, and a substantial risk of developing a SARS-CoV-2 test positivity. This lesson paved the way for the efficiency of hospital safety protocols and admission management, which contributed to the improved outcomes recorded during the second COVID-19 wave.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy can be safely performed during pandemic SARS-CoV-2 infection in Central Italy

OBJECTIVES

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is highly contagious; gastrointestinal endoscopies are considered risky procedures for the endoscopy staff. Data on the SARS-CoV-2-exposure/infection rate of gastrointestinal endoscopy staff is scarce. This study aimed to assess the SARS-CoV-2-exposure/infection rate among gastrointestinal endoscopists/nurses performing gastrointestinal endoscopies before and after the adoption of specific prevention measures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Cross-sectional study in a teaching hospital (Rome, Central Italy) on retrospective data (9 March-15 April 2020) of consecutive gastrointestinal endoscopies, characteristics of procedures, patients and endoscopy staff, SARS-CoV-2-exposure/positivity of patients and staff before and after adoption of prevention measures. Exposed staff tested for SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal swabs(RNA-PCR) and serology.

RESULTS

A total of 130 gastrointestinal endoscopies were performed in 130 patients (age 66 ± 14 years, 51% women, 51% inpatients, 56.9% lower). A total of 12 (9.2%) patients were SARS-CoV-2-positive and 14(10.8%) had a high risk of potential infection. Of the endoscopy staff (n = 16, 5 endoscopists, 8 nurses and 3 residents), 14 (87.5%) were exposed to SARS-CoV-2-infected and 16 (100%) to potentially infected patients. 3/5 and 5/5 endoscopists were exposed to actual and potential, 1/3 and 3/3 residents to actual and potential and 8/8 nurses to actual and potential infection, respectively. None of the staff was found to be infected with SARS-CoV-2. None experienced fever or any other suspicious symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019. Before the adoption of prevention measures, more endoscopists/nurses were in the endoscopy room than after (3.5 ± 0.6 vs. 2.1 ± 0.3, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite supposed high infection risk, gastrointestinal endoscopies may be safe for the endoscopy staff during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

The influence of the COVID-19 epidemic on the gastrointestinal endoscopy practice in China: a national survey

BACKGROUND AND AIM

With the worldwide spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), it has devastated the economy and taken a toll on people' life in every aspects. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the influence of the COVID-19 epidemic on the GI endoscopy practice in China.

METHODS

The nationwide survey conducted from 13 to 19 April, 2020. A predesigned standard structured questionnaire was sent to all members of the Chinese Society of Digestive Endoscopy (CSDE) in mainland China by email. Number of various GI endoscopic procedures and participants getting endoscopic training from January 1 to April 10, 2020 (the COVID-19 period) and the same period of 2019 were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 468 hospitals responded to this survey, and most of them (85.4%) were tertiary referral hospitals. The sum number of GI endoscopic procedures deceased significantly from 3,203,594 in 2019 to 1,512,619 in 2020, including 2,996,779 to 1,401,665 of diagnostic procedures and 206,815 to 110,954 of therapeutic procedures. More than half of centers (57.1%) reduced about 1,000-5,000 endoscopic activities. Of 271 hospitals (57.9%) providing endoscopic training, the total number of participants decreased from 2,977 in 2019 to 1,131 in 2020. Most of hospitals (93.8%) adhered to the recommendation of endoscopy practice issued by CSDE during the outbreak of COVID-19, and there was no cases of infection in endoscopic departments of all surveyed hospitals.

CONCLUSION

With the influence of the COVID-19 epidemic, there has been significant decease of GI endoscopy practice in mainland China.

Routine SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing before digestive endoscopy during the peak of the pandemic - a single tertiary center experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

COVID-19 pandemic has impacted on all endoscopy centers in the Czech Republic, that belongs to the most affected countries in the world. The aim of our study was to analyze all procedures following routine RT-PCR testing in our tertiary center during the peak of the pandemic.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all procedures performed from October 2020 to January 2021 after a new RT-PCR center had been set up. Main outcomes were type of scheduled procedure, indication, rate of therapeutic interventions and rate of new relevant and malignant findings. Comparison to the same period before the pandemic and SARS-CoV-2 infection in endoscopy staff are also reported.

RESULTS

A total of 1,953 procedures were performed. 624 patients were referred with a negative RT-PCR test and the remaining 1,346 patients were tested in the new center. 1,293 negative tests led to 1,329 procedures. A new relevant finding was reported in 589 (44.3%), including new malignancy in 56 (4.2%). 53 patients tested positive (3.9%). There was a reduction by 9% in the number of all procedures compared to the same period before the pandemic and an increase in the number of screening colonoscopies and ERCP procedures. In the study period, 9 of 54 staff members contracted SARS-CoV-2 infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine RT-PCR testing of patients scheduled for elective endoscopy during the peak of COVID-19 pandemic enabled us to essentially maintain our unit productivity, including activities such as screening colonoscopy, endoscopic resection and pancreatobiliary endoscopy.

Comparison of the impact of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography between pre-COVID-19 and current COVID-19 outbreaks in South Korea: Retrospective survey

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has markedly influenced the endoscopic patterns. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an essential technique for pancreatobiliary disease but increases the risk of exposure to the virus-containing body fluid; however, the impact of COVID-19 on ERCP is unknown.

AIM

To compare the number of endoscopic activities and to analyze the clinical outcomes of ERCPs before and during the COVID-19 outbreak in Daegu, South Kore.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients aged ≥ 18 years who underwent ERCP between February 18 and March 28, 2020, at a tertiary hospital. ERCP indications and endoscopic details were compared with those from the same period in 2018 and 2019 as control groups.

RESULTS

Of the 269 ERCP procedures, 113 (42.0%) cases were performed as emergency procedures. The number of ERCP procedures in 2018 and 2019 decreased by 20.2% and 56.6%, respectively, compared with that in 2020 (P < 0.01); among the 113 emergency ERCPs, the observed numbers in 2018 (n = 42) and 2019 (n = 55) dramatically dropped by 61.9% and 70.9%, respectively, compared with that in 2020 (n = 16). Of the 16 cases in 2020, stone removal was performed in five, biliary stenting in five, sphincterotomy in five, and nasobiliary drainage in one. No case of ERCP-related infection in medical workers or other patients has been reported.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 outbreak significantly reduced the number of ERCPs; however, there is no difference in the indications and endoscopic interventions before and during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Covid-19: exploring the "new normal" in gastroenterology training

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented disruptions in fellowship training programs worldwide. In gastroenterology, the strain in healthcare service provision and the emphasis on preventing viral transmission has adversely impacted hands-on training opportunities, with trainees facing the constant pressure to meet training requirements under the continuous threat of viral transmission. Emerging evidence highlight the scale of the problem, specifically with regard to endoscopy competence due to cancellation of elective endoscopic procedures, provision of inpatient and outpatient consultative care as well as academic education and the mental well-being of trainees. As such, it has been necessary for trainees, trainers and training programs collectively to adapt to these challenges and incorporate novel and adaptive solutions to circumvent these training barriers. This review aims to summarise data on the global impact of COVID-19 on gastroenterology training and the practical interventions that could be implemented.

The Future of Endoscopic Operations After the Coronavirus Pandemic

The unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic and its rapid global shutdowns have posed tremendous challenges for GI practices, including sudden delays in endoscopic procedures. As full reopening approaches, practices are wrestling with completely retooling their operations to ensure the resumption of high-quality, safe, and effective patient care. The pandemic's long-term effects on practice operations must be assessed: What will postpandemic GI care look like? Will some aspects of our work be changed forever, and if so, what are the practice management implications? This chapter surveys the pandemic's impact on US-based GI practices and discusses key "lessons learned" for future operations.

What gastroenterologists should know about SARS-CoV 2 vaccine: World Endoscopy Organization perspective

BACKGROUND

The novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has caused almost 2 million deaths worldwide. Both Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency have recently approved the first COVID-19 vaccines, and a few more are going to be approved soon.

METHODS

Several different approaches have been used to stimulate the immune system in mounting a humoral response. As more traditional approaches are under investigation (inactivated virus vaccines, protein subunit vaccines, recombinant virus vaccines), more recent and innovative strategies have been tried (non-replicating viral vector vaccines, RNA based vaccines, DNA based vaccines).

RESULTS

Since vaccinations campaigns started in December 2020 in both the US and Europe, gastroenterologists will be one of the main sources of information regarding SARS-CoV 2 vaccination for patients in their practice, including vulnerable patients such as those with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), patients with chronic liver disease, and GI cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, we must ourselves be well educated and updated in order to provide unambiguous counseling to these categories of vulnerable patients. In this commentary, we aim to provide a comprehensive review of both approved COVID-19 vaccines and the ones still under development, and explore potential risks, benefits and prioritization of vaccination.

Impact of COVID-19 on Endoscopy Training: Perspectives from a Global Survey of Program Directors and Endoscopy Trainers

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted the training of medical trainees internationally. The aim of this study was to assess the global impact of COVID-19 on endoscopy training from the perspective of endoscopy trainers and to identify strategies implemented to mitigate the impact on trainee education.

METHODS

Teaching faculty of gastroenterology (GI) training programs globally were invited to complete a 36-question web-based survey to report the characteristics of their training programs and the impact of COVID-19 on various aspects of endoscopy training, including what factors decisions were based on.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 52.6% (305 out of 580 individuals); 92.8% reported a negative impact on endoscopy training, with suspension of elective procedures (77.1%) being the most detrimental factor. Geographic variations were noted, with European programs reporting the lowest percentage of trainee participation in procedures. A higher proportion of trainees in the Americas were allowed to continue performing procedures, and trainers from the Americas reported receiving the greatest support for endoscopy teaching.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant negative impact on GI endoscopy training internationally, as reported by endoscopy trainers. Focus-optimizing endoscopy training and assessment of competencies are necessary to ensure adequate endoscopy training.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy

BACKGROUND

The impact of gastrointestinal endoscopy on COVID-19 infection remains poorly investigated. We herein performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the outcomes of COVID-19 in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHOD

Ovid Medline, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid the Cochrane Library, and other electronic databases were searched until 30 November 2020 to identify publications with confirmed COVID-19 infection in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. The primary outcomes were SARS-CoV-2 transmission, personal protective equipment use, rates of case fatality, complications, and procedural success.

RESULTS

A total of 18 articles involving 329 patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall basic reproduction rate is 0.37, while the subgroup results from Asia, Europe, and North America are 0.13, 0.44, and 0.33, respectively. The differences in personal protective equipment use between the positive transmission and non-transmission group are mainly in isolation gowns, N95 or equivalent masks, and goggles or face-shields. The rate of case fatality, complication, and procedural success are 0.17 (95% confidence interval = 0.02-0.38), 0.00 (95% confidence interval = 0.00-0.02), and 0.89 (95% confidence interval = 0.50-1.00), respectively. The fatality rate in Europe was the highest (0.23, 95% confidence interval = 0.04-0.50), which is significantly different from other continents (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

The risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission within gastrointestinal endoscopy units is considerably low if proper use of personal protective equipment is applied. Similarly, a low fatality and complication rate, as well as a high procedural success rate, indicated that a full recovery of endoscopic units should be considered.

Gastroenterologists attitude in various clinical settings in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: An online Uni-National Israeli Survey

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted our clinical practice. Many gastroenterologists have changed their attitudes toward various gastroenterological clinical settings. The aim of the present study is to explore the gastroenterologist's attitudes in several clinical settings encountered in the clinical practice.An online based survey was completed by 101 of 250 Israeli gastroenterologists (40.5%).Most of the participants were males (76.2%), and most of them were in the age range of 40 to 50 (37.6%). For all questionnaire components, the 2 most common chosen options were "I perform endoscopy with N95 mask, gloves and gown protection in a standard endoscopy room without preendoscopy severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing" and "Tend to postpone endoscopy until SARS-CoV-2 test is performed because of fear from being infected, or virus spreading in the endoscopy suite." Notably, 12 (11.9%) gastroenterologists were infected by Coronavirus disease 2019 during their work. Classifying the clinical settings to either elective and non-elective, most gastroenterologists (77.4%) chose the attitude of "I perform endoscopy with N95 mask, gloves and gown protection in a standard endoscopy room without SARS-COV-2 testing" in the nonelective settings as compared to 54.2% for the elective settings, (P < .00001), whereas 32.9% of the responders chose the attitude of "Tend to postpone endoscopy until SARS-COV-2 test is performed because of fear from being infected, or virus spreading in the endoscopy suite" in the elective settings (P < .00001).Gastroenterologists' attitude in various gastroenterological settings was based on the clinical indication. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term consequences of the different attitudes.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Utilization of EGD and Colonoscopy in the United States: An Analysis of the GIQuIC Registry

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has limited the ability to perform endoscopy. The aim of this study was to quantify the impact of the pandemic on endoscopy volumes and indications in the United States.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of data from the GI Quality Improvement Consortium (GIQuIC) registry. We compared volumes of colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) during the pandemic (March-September 2020) to before the pandemic (January 2019-February 2020). The primary outcome was change in monthly volumes. Secondary outcomes included changes in the distribution of procedure indications and in procedure volume by region of United States, patient characteristics, trainee involvement, and practice setting, as well as colorectal cancer diagnoses.

RESULTS

Among 451 sites with 3514 endoscopists, the average monthly volume of colonoscopies and EGDs dropped by 38.5% and 33.4%, respectively. There was regional variation, with the greatest and least decline in procedures in the Northeast and South, respectively. There was a modest shift in procedure indications from prevention to diagnostic, an initial increase in performance in the hospital setting, and a decrease in procedures with trainees. The decline in volume of colonoscopy and EGD during the first 7 months of the pandemic was equivalent to approximately 2.7 and 2.4 months of prepandemic productivity, respectively. Thirty percent fewer colorectal cancers were diagnosed compared to expected.

CONCLUSION

These data on actual endoscopy utilization nationally during the pandemic can help in anticipating impact of delays in care on outcomes and planning for the recovery phase.

Evidence-Based Selection on the Appropriate FIT Cut-Off Point in CRC Screening Programs in the COVID Pandemic

Background: The COVID pandemic has forced the closure of many colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. Resuming these programs is a priority, but fewer colonoscopies may be available. We developed an evidence-based tool for decision-making in CRC screening programs, based on a fecal hemoglobin immunological test (FIT), to optimize the strategy for screening a population for CRC.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data collected at a regional CRC screening program between February/2014 and November/2018. We investigated two different scenarios: not modifying vs. modifying the FIT cut-off value. We estimated program outcomes in the two scenarios by evaluating the numbers of cancers and adenomas missed or not diagnosed in due time (delayed).

Results: The current FIT cut-off (20-μg hemoglobin/g feces) led to 6,606 colonoscopies per 100,000 people invited annually. Without modifying this FIT cut-off value, when the optimal number of individuals invited for colonoscopies was reduced by 10–40%, a high number of CRCs and high-risk adenomas (34–135 and 73–288/100.000-people invited, respectively) will be undetected every year. When the FIT cut-off value was increased to where the colonoscopy demand matched the colonoscopy availability, the number of missed lesions per year was remarkably reduced (9–36 and 29–145/100.000 people, respectively). Moreover, the unmodified FIT scenario outcome was improved by prioritizing the selection process based on sex (males) and age, rather than randomly reducing the number invited.

Conclusions: Assuming a mismatch between the availability and demand for annual colonoscopies, increasing the FIT cut-off point was more effective than randomly reducing the number of people invited. Using specific risk factors to prioritize access to colonoscopies should be also considered.

Commonly available but highly effective protection against SARS-CoV-2 during gastrointestinal endoscopies

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

SARS-CoV-2 is a worldwide serious health problem. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the number of potentially infectious particles present during endoscopic procedures and find effective tools to eliminate the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection while performing them.

METHODS

An experimental model which focused on aerosol problematics was made in a specialized laboratory. This model simulated conditions present during endoscopic procedures and monitored the formation of potentially infectious fluid particles from the patient's body, which pass through the endoscope and are then released into the environment. For this reason, we designed and tested a prototype of a protective cover for the endoscope's control body to prevent the release and spread of these fluid particles from its working channel. We performed measurements with and without the protective cover of the endoscope's control body.

RESULTS

It was found that liquid coming through the working channel of the endoscope with forceps or other instruments inside generates droplets with a diameter in the range of 0.1-1.1 mm and an initial velocity of up to 0.9 m/s. The average number of particles per measurement per whole measured area without a protective cover on the endoscope control body was 51.1; with this protective cover on, the measurement was 0.0, p<0.0001.

CONCLUSIONS

Our measurements proved that fluid particles are released from the working channel of an endoscope when forceps are inserted. A special protective cover for the endoscope control body, made out of breathable material (surgical cap) and designed by our team, was found to eliminate this release of potentially infectious fluid particles.

A novel mask to prevent aerosolized droplet dispersion in endoscopic procedures during the coronavirus disease pandemic

Endoscopic procedures increase the risk of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to medical staff, because aerosols are generated during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. There have been several reported studies on devices for infection prevention; however, few reports have validated them. Therefore, we developed a novel mask to prevent the diffusion of aerosol droplets from patients undergoing endoscopy.We compared microdroplet dispersion during coughing episodes when using the novel mask with microdroplet dispersion when using the conventional mouthpiece alone.The mean number of microdroplets was significantly smaller in the group that used the novel mask (57.9 ± 122.91 vs 933.6 ± 119.80 droplets; P = .01).The novel mask may aid in reducing the degree of exposure of medical personnel to microdroplets and the risk of subsequent infection.

Safety and protection in endoscopic services during phase II of COVID-19 pandemic: a national survey

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires appropriate measures for containing infection spreading. Endoscopic procedures are considered at increased risk of infection transmission. We evaluated organizational aspects and personal behaviours in Italian Endoscopic Units during phase II of the pandemic.

METHODS

A questionnaire on organizational aspects and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) were e-mailed to gastroenterologists working in Endoscopic Units. Data were analysed accordingly to the National Health Institute and Gastroenterology Societies recommendations.

RESULTS

Data of 117 centres were collected, and different shortcomings emerged. Specific protocols for containing infection and training programs for operators were lacking in 20 and 30% of centres, respectively, and telephone triage 24-72 h before the endoscopy was not implemented in 25% of hospitals. In 30% of centres, the slot time for endoscopies and between examinations was not prolonged. PPE, masks, shirts and gloves were universally adopted, although with some differences. In 20% of centres, a FFPE-FFP3 mask was not adopted during endoscopic examinations. Postendoscopy patient tracking/contact was completed in only one-third of centres.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey provides information on organizational and medical behaviours during COVID-19 phase II in Italy, which could be useful for adopting appropriate measures for containing COVID-19 spread during phase II.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical Schedules and Physical and Mental Well-Being of Gastroenterology Nonphysician Healthcare Workers: A Nationwide Survey

COVID-19 was declared a pandemic in March 2020 by the World Health Organization. To minimize exposure and because of limited personal protective equipment resources, most gastroenterology practices were curtailed/modified during the surge, with slow reopening to a normal/semi-normal schedule. Gastroenterology healthcare workers have been impacted greatly by COVID-19, resulting in job and wage insecurity. The aim of our study was to understand the impact of COVID-19 on gastroenterology healthcare workers across the United States. A web-based survey, consisting of 40 questions, was disseminated among gastroenterology practices across the United States via en masse e-mails and direct contact by authors. In total, 223 gastroenterology healthcare workers completed the survey; 56.1% were from academic settings. COVID-19 impacted the work schedule of 85.2% of participants, with reduced weekly work hours (38.1%), duty reassignment (22.4%), and furlough (13.9%). Uncertainty about job and/or future wages/benefits after reopening was noted in 41%, which was significantly associated with the presence of physical (p = .021) and mental/emotional symptoms (p = .045). Worsening of pre-existing physical and/or mental/emotional conditions was observed in 53%. Inadequate personal protective equipment availability, lack of temporary housing and/or childcare facilities, as well as job insecurity appear to be the important factors leading to worsening physical/mental/emotional conditions among gastroenterology healthcare workers.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on fecal immunochemical test screening uptake and compliance to diagnostic colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

During this COVID-19 pandemic, Taiwan is one of the few countries where fecal immunochemical test and endoscopic activity for colorectal cancer screening keeps ongoing. We aimed to investigate how screening uptake and colonoscopy rate were affected in one of the biggest screening hubs in Northern Taiwan.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study tracing and analyzing the screening uptake and the trend of compliance to diagnostic colonoscopy in fecal immunochemical test-positive subjects in the National Taiwan University Hospital screening hub since the outbreak of COVID-19 and compared it with that of the corresponding periods in the past 3 years. Cancellation and rescheduling rates of colonoscopy and related reasons were also explored.

RESULTS

Screening uptake during December 2019 to April 2020 was 88.8%, which was significantly lower than that in the corresponding period of the past 3 years (91.2-92.7%, P for trend < 0.0001). Colonoscopy rate in this period was 66.1%, which was also significantly lower than that in the past 3 years (70.2-77.5%, P for trend = 0.017). Rescheduling or cancellation rate was up to 10.9%, which was significantly higher than that in the past 3 years (P for trend = 0.023), and half of them was due to the fear of being infected.

CONCLUSION

Fecal immunochemical test screening was significantly affected by COVID-19 pandemic. In order to resume the practice in COVID-19 era, screening organizers should consider various approaches to secure timely diagnosis of colorectal cancer.

COVID-19 and Canadian Gastroenterology Trainees

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted endoscopy services and education worldwide. This study aimed to characterize the impact of COVID-19 on gastroenterology trainees in Canada.

METHODS

An analysis of Canadian respondents from the international EndoTrain survey, open from April 11 to May 2 2020 and distributed by program directors, trainees, and national and international gastroenterology societies' representatives, was completed. The survey included questions on monthly endoscopy volume, personal protective equipment availability, trainee well-being and educational resources. The primary outcome was change in procedural volume during the COVID-19 pandemic. Secondary outcomes included trainee's professional and personal concerns, anxiety and burnout.

RESULTS

Thirty-four Canadian trainees completed the survey. Per month, participants completed a median of 30 esophagogastroduodenoscopies (interquartile range 16 to 50) prior to the pandemic compared to 2 (0 to 10) during the pandemic, 20 (8 to 30) compared to 2 (0 to 5) colonoscopies and 3 (1 to 10) compared to 0 (0 to 3) upper gastrointestinal bleeding procedures. There was a significant decrease in procedural volumes between the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 time periods for all procedures (P < 0.001). Thirty (88%) trainees were concerned about personal COVID-19 exposure, 32 (94%) were concerned about achieving and/or maintaining clinical competence and 24 (71%) were concerned about prolongation of training time due to the pandemic. Twenty-six (79%) respondents experienced some degree of anxiety, and 10 (31%) experienced some degree of burnout.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has substantially impacted gastroenterology trainees in Canada. As the pandemic eases, it important for gastrointestinal programs to adapt to maximize resident learning, maintain effective clinical care and ensure development of endoscopic competence.

Changes in endoscopic patterns before and during COVID-19 outbreak: Experience at a single tertiary center in Korean

BACKGROUND

The surge of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has markedly influenced the treatment policies of tertiary hospitals because of the need to protect medical staff and contain viral transmission, but the impact COVID-19 had on emergency gastrointestinal endoscopies has not been determined.

AIM

To compare endoscopic activities and analyze the clinical outcomes of emergency endoscopies performed before and during the COVID-19 outbreak in Daegu, the worst-hit region in South Korea.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients aged ≥ 18 years that underwent endoscopy from February 18 to March 28, 2020, at a tertiary hospital in Daegu. Demographics, laboratory findings, types and causes of emergency endoscopies, and endoscopic reports were reviewed and compared with those obtained for the same period in 2018 and 2019.

RESULTS

From February 18 to March 28, a total of 366 emergent endoscopic procedures were performed: Upper endoscopy (170, 50.6%), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (113, 33.6%), and colonoscopy with sigmoidoscopy (53, 15.8%). The numbers of procedures performed in 2018 and 2019 dropped by 48.8% and 54.8%, respectively, compared with those in 2020. During the COVID-19 outbreak, the main indications for endoscopy were melena (36.7%), hematemesis (30.6%), and hematochezia (10.2%). Of the endoscopic abnormalities detected, gastrointestinal bleeding was the most common: 39 cases in 2018, 51 in 2019, and 35 in 2020.

CONCLUSION

The impact of COVID-19 is substantial and caused dramatic reductions in endoscopic procedures and changes in patient behaviors. Long-term follow-up studies are required to determine the effects of COVID-19 induced changes in the endoscopy field.

Factors associated with risk of COVID-19 contagion for endoscopy healthcare workers: A survey from the Italian society of digestive endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The present study was aimed to assess the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated factors among HCWs in endoscopy centers in Italy.

METHODS

All members of the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SIED) were invited to participate to a questionnaire-based survey during the first months of the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy.

RESULTS

314/1306 (24%) SIED members accounting for 201/502 (40%) endoscopic centers completed the survey. Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) were available in most centers, but filtering face-piece masks (FFP2 or FFP3) and negative pressure room were not in 10.9 and 75.1%. Training courses on PPE use were provided in 57.2% of centers only; there was at least one positive HCW in 17.4% of centers globally, 107/3308 (3.2%) HCWs were diagnosed with COVID-19 with similar rates of physicians (2.9%), nurses (3.5%) and other health operators (3.5%). Involvement in a COVID-19 care team (OR: 4.96) and the lack of training courses for PPE, (OR: 2.65) were associated with increased risk.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of COVID-19 among endoscopy HCWs was not negligible and was associated with work in a COVID-19 care team and lack of education on proper PPE use. These data deserve attention during the subsequent waves.

Optimal diagnostic tool for surveillance of oesophageal varices during COVID-19 pandemic

AIM

To study the diagnostic accuracy and utility of triphasic abdominal computed tomography (CT) in the diagnosis and grading of oesophageal varices (OVs) as an alternative to endoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective analysis was undertaken of retrospective data from cirrhotic patients who underwent oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (OGD) and a triphasic abdominal CT from January to December 2019. Endoscopists and radiologists provided their respective independent assessment of OV grading after being blinded to the clinical details. Performance of CT grading of OVs was compared with the reference standard endoscopic grading using weighted kappa (k). Non-invasive scores such, as aspartate transaminase (AST)-to-platelet ratio index (APRI), Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) Index, platelet: spleen (PS) ratio were correlated between the two techniques.

RESULTS

OV grading between endoscopists and radiologists showed 81.73% agreement (85 out of 104 patients) in the comparative analysis of 104 cirrhotic patients, of which no varices (57.1%, n=4), small (85.1%, n=23), medium (72.2%%, n=26), and large varices (94.1%, n=32) with a weighted k score of 0.88 (95% confidence interval 0.82-0.94). Overall, the sensitivity of CT in the diagnosis of no, small, medium, and large OVs was 66.6%, 79.3%, 89.6%, and 94.1%, respectively, with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) score of 0.775, 0.887, 0.839, and 0.914. Performance of APRI, FIB-4, and PS ratio correlated well with the severity of OVs with no difference between OGD and CT grading.

CONCLUSION

Triphasic abdominal CT can be an invaluable tool in the diagnosis and grading of OVs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

International Observational Survey of the Effectiveness of Personal Protective Equipment during Endoscopic Procedures Performed in Patients with COVID-19

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

This international survey was performed to evaluate the cumulative incidence of nosocomial novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among healthcare professionals during endoscopic procedures.

METHODS

We performed an international web-based self-reported questionnaire survey. Participants completed the questionnaires every week for 12 weeks. The questionnaire elicited responses regarding the development of COVID-19 and details of the personal protective equipment (PPE) used.

RESULTS

All 483 participants were included in the analysis. Participants had a mean age of 42.3 years and comprised 68.3% males. The geographic distribution of the study population was Asia (89.2%), Europe (2.9%), North and South America (4.8%), Oceania (0.6%), and Africa (1.5%). The most common endoscopy-related role of the participants was endoscopist (78.7%), and 74.5% had >10 years of experience. Fourteen participants had performed 83 endoscopic procedures in patients positive for COVID-19. During the mean follow-up period of 4.95 weeks, there were no cases of COVID-19 when treating COVID-19 positive patients. The most common PPE used by participants treating patients with COVID-19 was a surgical mask plus N95 mask plus face shield, goggles, cap, long-sleeved isolation gown, and single pair of gloves. The most common PPE used by participants treating patients without COVID-19 was a surgical mask, no face shield but goggles, cap, long-sleeved isolation gown, and single pair of gloves during all endoscopic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of COVID-19 transmission during any endoscopic procedure was low in clinical practice.