Western outcomes of circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection (cESD) in the esophagus has been reported to be feasible in small Eastern case series. We assessed the outcomes of cESD in the treatment of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in Western countries.

METHODS

We conducted an international study at 25 referral centers in Europe and Australia using prospective databases. We included all patients with ESCC treated with cESD before November 2022. Our main outcomes were curative resection according to European guidelines and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 171 cESDs were performed on 165 patients. En bloc and R0 resections rates were 98.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.0-99.4) and 69.6% (95% CI, 62.3-76.0), respectively. Curative resection was achieved in 49.1% (95% CI, 41.7-56.6) of the lesions. The most common reason for noncurative resection was deep submucosal invasion (21.6%). The risk of stricture requiring 6 or more dilations or additional techniques (incisional therapy/stent) was high (71%), despite the use of prophylactic measures in 93% of the procedures. The rates of intraprocedural perforation, delayed bleeding, and adverse cardiorespiratory events were 4.1%, 0.6%, and 4.7%, respectively. Two patients died (1.2%) of a cESD-related adverse event. Overall and disease-free survival rates at 2 years were 91% and 79%.

CONCLUSIONS

In Western referral centers, cESD for ESCC is curative in approximately half of the lesions. It can be considered a feasible treatment in selected patients. Our results suggest the need to improve patient selection and to develop more effective therapies to prevent esophageal strictures.

Management of high risk T1 gastric adenocarcinoma following endoscopic resection

Endoscopic submucosal dissection has revolutionized the treatment of early gastric cancer. However, cases that do not meet the curability criteria have a higher risk of lymph node metastasis and salvage surgery is still considered the next treatment approach to increase the chance of cure. Nevertheless, not all high-risk resections entail the same level of risk, emphasizing the utmost importance of individualized stratification for further treatment. In this review, we aim to examine the current evidence concerning the management following a high-risk non-curative resection, highlighting the existing approaches, while also presenting upcoming strategies that attempt to improve patient outcomes, minimize adverse events, and provide a tailored management.

Curative criteria for endoscopic treatment of gastric cancer

Endoscopic treatment, particularly endoscopic submucosal dissection, has become the primary treatment for early gastric cancer. A comprehensive optical assessment, including white light endoscopy, image-enhanced endoscopy, and magnification, are the cornerstones for clinical staging and determining the resectability of lesions. This paper discusses factors that influence the indication for endoscopic resection and the likelihood of achieving a curative resection. Our review stresses the critical need for interpreting the histopathological report in accordance with clinical guidelines and the imperative of tailoring decisions based on the patients' and lesions' characteristics and preferences. Moreover, we offer guidance on managing complex scenarios, such as those involving non-curative resection. Finally, we identify future research avenues, including the role of artificial intelligence in estimating the depth of invasion and the urgent need to refine predictive scores for lymph node metastasis and metachronous lesions.

Development and validation of the PERCEPT-PREVENT tool to determine risk perception and attitudes towards digestive cancer screening

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is recommended worldwide, while gastric cancer (GC) screening may also be defendable in some settings. However, adherence rates and factors influencing participation are not well characterized. This study aimed to validate a tool to determine risk perception of CRC and GC and also of endoscopy-related complications.

METHODS

A questionnaire in CRC risk perception based on the Health Belief Model was used. Forward/backward translation (English-Portuguese) and cultural adaptation were performed. After revision by a panel of experts, the questionnaire was adapted to target GC risk perception and perceptions towards endoscopy-related complications. The final version of the questionnaire (PERCEPT-PREVENT tool) was applied to 44 individuals, through telephonic interview, at enrolment and at intervals ≤3 weeks. Test-retest reliability and agreement were assessed.

RESULTS

Almost perfect reliability between test and retest was obtained for CRC symptom knowledge score (ICC = 0.88), risk factor knowledge score (ICC = 0.89), and perceived severity (ICC = 0.84). At least moderate agreement between test and retest was obtained for GC symptom knowledge score (ICC = 0.94), risk factor knowledge score (ICC = 0.92), and perceived severity (ICC = 0.58). Test-retest reliability was assessed for barrier domains [faecal occult blood test ICC = 0.63; colonoscopy ICC = 0.79; upper GI endoscopy (UGIE) ICC = 0.83]. A total of 91% and 98% of participants gave the same answer in the test and retest for preferred method of CRC screening and intention to undergo UGIE for GC screening combined with a screening colonoscopy, respectively.

DISCUSSION

PERCEPT-PREVENT is a valid and reliable tool for CRC and GC risk perception evaluation.

A rare case of an esophageal neuroendocrine carcinoma arising on an endoscopic resection scar

Here we report a case of a 61-year-old woman who underwent en-bloc endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of a 10mm depressed lesion (Paris 0-IIc, Figure A) in the mid-esophagus. Histopathology showed a lesion with high-grade squamous dysplasia (R0). On follow-up endoscopy at 6 and 12 months the scar was regular, without signs of recurrence. Seven months after the last endoscopy, the patient presented with chest pain and dysphagia. Endoscopy showed an ulcero-vegetating tumor with 3cm at the same location of previous ESD (Figure B), and biopsies showed a poorly differentiated small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC). Subsequent computed tomography identified peri-tumor and hilar lymph nodes, and an extensive periceliac nodal conglomerate adherent to the liver (stage IV). This is, to our knowledge, the first case described of esophageal NEC arising on the endoscopic resection scar.

Metachronous lesions after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection: first assessment of the FAMISH prediction score

BACKGROUND

Surveillance after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is recommended for all patients owing to the persistent risk of metachronous gastric lesions (MGLs). We developed and validated a prediction score to estimate MGL risk after ESD for early neoplastic gastric lesions, to define an individualized and cost-saving approach.

METHODS

Clinical predictors and a risk score were derived from meta-analysis data. A retrospective, single-center, cohort study including patients with ≥ 3 years of standardized surveillance after ESD was conducted for score validation. Predictive accuracy of the score by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was assessed and cumulative probabilities of MGL were estimated.

RESULTS

The risk score (0-9 points) included six clinical predictors (scored 0-3): positive family history of gastric cancer, older age, male sex, corpus intestinal metaplasia, synchronous gastric lesions, and persistent Helicobacter pylori infection (FAMISH). The study population included 263 patients. The MGL rate was 16 %. The score diagnostic accuracy for predicting MGL at 3 years' follow-up, measured by the AUC, was 0.704 (95 %CI 0.603-0.806). At 3 years and a cutoff < 2, the score achieved maximal sensitivity and negative predictive value; 15 % of patients could be assigned to a low-risk group, in which the progression to MGL was significantly lower than for the high-risk group (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The FAMISH score might be a useful tool to accurately identify patients with low-to-intermediate risk for MGL at 3 years of follow-up who could have surveillance intervals extended to reduce the burden of care.

Real-time assessment of H. pylori during the endoscopic assessment of individuals with gastric intestinal metaplasia: a possible way to reduce the burden of care

OBJECTIVES

The management of individuals with gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) includes biopsies for its staging and to diagnose Helicobacter pylori (Hp ). Advanced-stage GIM can be estimated by endoscopy through EGGIM, and a new device permits the real-time assessment of ammonia for the identification of Hp infection. The aim of this study was to assess the simultaneous use of EGGIM and real-time assessment of ammonia to avoid biopsies and reduce the burden of care in clinical practice.

METHODS

A multicentre study involving 101 consecutively enrolled patients [52% male; 65(18-85) years]. During endoscopy, gastric juice was aspirated and analysed; EGGIM was determined in real-time. Targeted biopsies were performed and histopathological assessment was used as gold standard.

RESULTS

Advanced-stage GIM were detected in 14.9% of patients and Hp infection in 18.8%. EGGIM showed for advanced-stage GIM a sensitivity, specificity and NPV of 86.7%, 84.9% and 97.3%, whilst real-time assessment of ammonia, 83.3%, 78.2% and 95.4%, respectively. Gastric juice was insufficient in 5 (5.0%). Overall, 64 (67%) patients were correctly diagnosed by EGGIM and real-time assessment of ammonia. If the 47 (49%) patients negative to both assessments would have avoided biopsies, only 4 (4.2%) would have been missed: two with advanced-stage GIM and two with Hp infection.

CONCLUSION

The combination of endoscopic assessment and real-time analysis of Hp allows the exclusion of advanced-stage GIM or Hp infection without the need of biopsies in a significant proportion of individuals. This may allow in specific situations to abstain from biopsies reducing the burden of care.

Gastric Cancer: A Practical Review on Management of Individuals with Hereditary or Familial Risk for Gastric Cancer

Gastric adenocarcinoma is one of the most frequent and deadly cancers worldwide. However, its incidence is variable, being higher in eastern countries where screening the general population is recommended. On the other hand, in low to intermediate-risk countries, screening the general population may not be cost-effective, and therefore, it is necessary to be aware of high-risk populations that may benefit from adequate screening and surveillance. It is not always easy to identify these individuals, leading to a late diagnosis of gastric adenocarcinoma. In this review, the authors intend to summarize the data required to identify the population at risk of sporadic or familial gastric adenocarcinoma and the beginning of screening and its surveillance, with the final aim of increasing early detection of gastric adenocarcinoma and decreasing morbimortality. The authors highlight the importance to be aware of the several hereditary syndromes and MAPS recommendations and apply screen and surveillance protocols. The high-risk syndromes to gastric adenocarcinoma are gastric adenocarcinoma and proximal polyposis of the stomach, hereditary diffuse gastric cancer, and familial intestinal gastric cancer.

Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastric Cancer and Pre-Malignant Gastric Lesions

Early gastric cancer comprises gastric malignancies that are confined to the mucosa or submucosa, irrespective of lymph node metastasis. Endoscopic resection is currently pivotal for the management of such early lesions, and it is the recommended treatment for tumors presenting a very low risk of lymph node metastasis. In general, these lesions consist of two groups of differentiated mucosal adenocarcinomas: non-ulcerated lesions (regardless of their size) and small ulcerated lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection is the technique of choice in most cases. This procedure has high rates of complete histological resection while maintaining gastric anatomy and its functions, resulting in fewer adverse events than surgery and having a lesser impact on patient-reported quality of life. Nonetheless, approximately 20% of resected lesions do not fulfill curative criteria and demand further treatment, highlighting the importance of patient selection. Additionally, the preservation of the stomach results in a moderate risk of metachronous lesions, which underlines the need for surveillance. We review the current evidence regarding the endoscopic treatment of early gastric cancer, including the short-and long-term results and management after resection.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection techniques and technology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Review

ESGE suggests conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD; marking and mucosal incision followed by circumferential incision and stepwise submucosal dissection) for most esophageal and gastric lesions. ESGE suggests tunneling ESD for esophageal lesions involving more than two-thirds of the esophageal circumference. ESGE recommends the pocket-creation method for colorectal ESD, at least if traction devices are not used. The use of dedicated ESD knives with size adequate to the location/thickness of the gastrointestinal wall is recommended. It is suggested that isotonic saline or viscous solutions can be used for submucosal injection. ESGE recommends traction methods in esophageal and colorectal ESD and in selected gastric lesions. After gastric ESD, coagulation of visible vessels is recommended, and post-procedural high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (or vonoprazan). ESGE recommends against routine closure of the ESD defect, except in duodenal ESD. ESGE recommends corticosteroids after resection of  > 50 % of the esophageal circumference. The use of carbon dioxide when performing ESD is recommended. ESGE recommends against the performance of second-look endoscopy after ESD. ESGE recommends endoscopy/colonoscopy in the case of significant bleeding (hemodynamic instability, drop in hemoglobin > 2 g/dL, severe ongoing bleeding) to perform endoscopic hemostasis with thermal methods or clipping; hemostatic powders represent rescue therapies. ESGE recommends closure of immediate perforations with clips (through-the-scope or cap-mounted, depending on the size and shape of the perforation), as soon as possible but ideally after securing a good plane for further dissection.

Spontaneous regression of a rectal cancer

A 42-year-old woman underwent a total colonoscopy due to haematochezia and weight loss. A rectal lateral spreading lesion with 2 5mm in diameter was identified and biopsies revealed villous adenoma with high-grade dysplasia. After referral to our centre, sigmoidoscopy confirmed the presence of a 25 mm lesion (NICE 3) with non-lifting sign and EUS showed a hypoechoic lesion with at least submucosal invasion and suspicious images of muscularis propria invasion - uT1/2N0. New biopsies shown the presence of adenocarcinoma. The patient was submitted to surgical anterior resection of the rectum. Intraoperative extemporaneous examination of the specimen did not identify the lesion and an intraoperative colonoscopy was performed not showing any lesion in the rectal stump. Pathological examination, after total inclusion of the specimen, showed a 7mm scar with fibrosis of the submucosa, chronic inflammatory infiltrate, vascular ectasia and congestion and mucosal erosion, without identification of residual neoplasia.To date (20 months of follow-up) there is no evidence of disease persistence or recurrence with a sigmoidoscopy performed 3 months after surgery.

Anastomotic Leakages after Surgery for Gastroesophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Endoscopic versus Surgical Management

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> With the increase of esophageal and gastric cancer, surgery will be more often performed. Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most feared postoperative complications of gastroesophageal surgery. It can be managed by conservative, endoscopic (such as endoscopic vacuum therapy and stenting), or surgical methods, but optimal treatment remains controversial. The aim of our meta-analysis was to compare (a) endoscopic and surgical interventions and (b) different endoscopic treatments for AL following gastroesophageal cancer surgery. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Systematic review and meta-analysis, with search in three online databases for studies evaluating surgical and endoscopic treatments for AL following gastroesophageal cancer surgery. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 32 studies comprising 1,080 patients were included. Compared with surgical intervention, endoscopic treatment presented similar clinical success, hospital length of stay, and intensive care unit length of stay, but lower in-hospital mortality (6.4% [95% CI: 3.8–9.6%] vs. 35.8% [95% CI: 23.9–48.5%]. Endoscopic vacuum therapy was associated with a lower rate of complications (OR 0.348 [95% CI: 0.127–0.954]), shorter ICU length of stay (mean difference −14.77 days [95% CI: −26.57 to −2.98]), and time until AL resolution (17.6 days [95% CI: 14.1–21.2] vs. 39.4 days [95% CI: 27.0–51.8]) when compared with stenting, but there were no significant differences in terms of clinical success, mortality, reinterventions, or hospital length of stay. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Endoscopic treatment, in particular endoscopic vacuum therapy, seems safer and more effective when compared with surgery. However, more robust comparative studies are needed, especially for clarifying which is the best treatment in specific situations (according to patient and leak characteristics).

Expected value of artificial intelligence in gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

This ESGE Position Statement defines the expected value of artificial intelligence (AI) for the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal neoplasia within the framework of the performance measures already defined by ESGE. This is based on the clinical relevance of the expected task and the preliminary evidence regarding artificial intelligence in artificial or clinical settings. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS:: (1) For acceptance of AI in assessment of completeness of upper GI endoscopy, the adequate level of mucosal inspection with AI should be comparable to that assessed by experienced endoscopists. (2) For acceptance of AI in assessment of completeness of upper GI endoscopy, automated recognition and photodocumentation of relevant anatomical landmarks should be obtained in ≥90% of the procedures. (3) For acceptance of AI in the detection of Barrett's high grade intraepithelial neoplasia or cancer, the AI-assisted detection rate for suspicious lesions for targeted biopsies should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists with or without advanced imaging techniques. (4) For acceptance of AI in the management of Barrett's neoplasia, AI-assisted selection of lesions amenable to endoscopic resection should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists. (5) For acceptance of AI in the diagnosis of gastric precancerous conditions, AI-assisted diagnosis of atrophy and intestinal metaplasia should be comparable to that provided by the established biopsy protocol, including the estimation of extent, and consequent allocation to the correct endoscopic surveillance interval. (6) For acceptance of artificial intelligence for automated lesion detection in small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE), the performance of AI-assisted reading should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists for lesion detection, without increasing but possibly reducing the reading time of the operator. (7) For acceptance of AI in the detection of colorectal polyps, the AI-assisted adenoma detection rate should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists. (8) For acceptance of AI optical diagnosis (computer-aided diagnosis [CADx]) of diminutive polyps (≤5 mm), AI-assisted characterization should match performance standards for implementing resect-and-discard and diagnose-and-leave strategies. (9) For acceptance of AI in the management of polyps ≥ 6 mm, AI-assisted characterization should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists in selecting lesions amenable to endoscopic resection.

Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aims

Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) combines advantages of endoscopy and laparoscopy in order to resect upper gastrointestinal lesions. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LECS in patients with EGJ (esophagogastric junction), gastric and duodenal lesions, as well as to compare LECS with pure endoscopic and pure laparoscopic procedures.

Methods

PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge were searched. Efficacy (R0, recurrence) and safety (conversion rate, procedure and hospitalization time, adverse events, mortality) outcomes were extracted and pooled (odds ratio or mean difference) using a random-effects model. Study quality was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and heterogeneity by Cochran's Q test and I² . Subgroup analysis according to location was performed.

Results

This meta-analysis included 24 studies/1,336 patients (all retrospective cohorts). No significant differences were found between LECS and preexisting techniques (endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)/laparoscopy) regarding any outcomes. However, there was a trend to shorter hospitalization time, longer procedure duration, and fewer adverse events in LECS versus Laparoscopy and ESD. R0 tended to be higher in the LECS group. Hospitalization time was significantly shorter in gastric versus EGJ lesions (mean 7.3 vs. 13.7 days, 95% CI: 6.6-7.9 vs. 8.9-19.3). There were no significant differences in conversion rate, adverse events, or mean procedural time according to location. There was a trend to higher conversion rate and longer procedure durations in EGJ and higher rate of adverse events in duodenal lesions.

Conclusion

LECS is a valid, safe, and effective treatment option in patients with EGJ, gastric, and duodenal lesions, although existing studies are retrospective and prone to selection bias. Prospective studies are needed to assess if LECS is superior to established techniques.

Key Messages

LECS is safe and effective in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal lesions, but there is no evidence of superiority over established techniques.

Pharmacological Treatment of Functional Dyspepsia: An Old Story Revisited or a New Story to Be Told? A Clinical Review

Dyspepsia incorporates a set of symptoms originating from the gastroduodenal region, frequently encountered in the adult population in the Western world. Most patients with symptoms compatible with dyspepsia eventually end up, in the absence of a potential organic cause, being diagnosed with functional dyspepsia. Many have been the new insights in the pathophysiology behind functional dyspeptic symptoms, namely, hypersensitivity to acid, duodenal eosinophilia, and altered gastric emptying, among others. Since these discoveries, new therapies have been proposed. Even so, an established mechanism for functional dyspepsia is not yet a reality, which makes its treatment a clinical challenge. In this paper, we review some of the possible approaches to treatment, both well established and some new therapeutic targets. Recommendations about dose and time of use are also made.

Gastric cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastric cancer (GC) screening is recommended in high-risk populations, although screening methods and intervals vary. In intermediate-risk populations, screening through esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) may be considered depending on local resources. The aim of this study was to compare GC screening methods regarding effect on mortality, diagnostic yield and adherence.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis including studies evaluating population-based GC screening. Search was conducted in three online databases (MEDLINE, Scopus and clinicaltrials.gov), along with manual search.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies were included. Studies in upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) demonstrated that GC screening was associated with significantly lower GC mortality rates (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.55 - 0.73). Benefits on mortality were also found in EGD and serum pepsinogen (PG) studies. EGD was associated with significantly higher GC (0.55%, 95% CI 0.39 - 0.75%) and early-GC (EGC) detection rates (0.48%, 95% CI 0.34 - 0.65%) when compared to UGIS (GC 0.19%, 95% CI 0.10 - 0.31%; EGC 0.08%, 95% CI 0.04 - 0.13%) and PG (GC 0.10%, 95% CI 0.05 - 0.16%; EGC 0.10%, 95% CI 0.04 - 0.19%). Non-invasive methods tended to higher adherence rates when compared to EGD. Regardless of the screening method, individualized recruitment performed better.

DISCUSSION

Screening positively impacted GC mortality rates. EGD was associated with higher diagnostic yield, while UGIS and PG tended to higher adherence rates. Screening uptake was predominantly impacted by recruitment strategies independently of the adopted method.

Risk factors for gastric metachronous lesions after endoscopic or surgical resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION : Metachronous gastric lesions (MGL) are a significant concern after both endoscopic and surgical resection for early gastric cancer. Identification of risk factors for MGL could help to individualize surveillance schedules and potentially reduce the burden of care, but data are inconclusive. We aimed to identify risk factors for MGL and compare the incidence after endoscopic resection (ER) and subtotal gastrectomy. METHODS : We conducted a systematic review by searching PubMed, ISI, and Scopus, and performed meta-analysis. RESULTS : 52 studies were included. Pooled cumulative MGL incidence after ER was 9.3 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 7.7 % to 11.0 %), significantly higher than after subtotal gastrectomy (1.2 %, 95 %CI 0.5 % to 2.2 %). After adjusting for mean follow-up, predicted MGL at 5 years was 9.5 % after ER and 0.7 % after subtotal gastrectomy. Older age (mean difference 1.08 years, 95 %CI 0.21 to 1.96), male sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.43, 95 %CI 1.22 to 1.66), family history of gastric cancer (OR 1.88, 95 %CI 1.03 to 3.41), synchronous lesions (OR 1.72, 95 %CI 1.30 to 2.28), severe gastric mucosal atrophy (OR 2.77, 95 %CI 1.22 to 6.29), intestinal metaplasia in corpus (OR 3.15, 95 %CI 1.67 to 5.96), persistent Helicobacter pylori infection (OR 2.08, 95 %CI 1.60 to 2.72), and lower pepsinogen I/II ratio (mean difference -0.54, 95 %CI -0.86 to -0.22) were significantly associated with MGL after ER. Index lesion characteristics were not significantly associated with MGL. ER treatment was possible in 83.2 % of 914 MGLs (95 %CI 72.2 to 91.9 %). CONCLUSION : Follow-up schedules should be different after ER and subtotal gastrectomy, and individualized further based on diverse risk factors.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal lesions: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2022

ESGE recommends that the evaluation of superficial gastrointestinal (GI) lesions should be made by an experienced endoscopist, using high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based).ESGE does not recommend routine performance of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or positron emission tomography (PET)-CT prior to endoscopic resection.ESGE recommends endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as the treatment of choice for most superficial esophageal squamous cell and superficial gastric lesions.For Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated lesions, ESGE suggests the use of ESD for lesions suspicious of submucosal invasion (Paris type 0-Is, 0-IIc), for malignant lesions > 20 mm, and for lesions in scarred/fibrotic areas.ESGE does not recommend routine use of ESD for duodenal or small-bowel lesions.ESGE suggests that ESD should be considered for en bloc resection of colorectal (but particularly rectal) lesions with suspicion of limited submucosal invasion (demarcated depressed area with irregular surface pattern or a large protruding or bulky component, particularly if the lesions are larger than 20 mm) or for lesions that otherwise cannot be completely removed by snare-based techniques.ESGE recommends that an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with histology no more advanced than intramucosal cancer (no more than m2 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma), well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion or ulceration, should be considered a very low risk (curative) resection, and no further staging procedure or treatment is generally recommended.ESGE recommends that the following should be considered to be a low risk (curative) resection and no further treatment is generally recommended: an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with superficial submucosal invasion (sm1), that is well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion, of size ≤ 20 mm for an esophageal squamous cell carcinoma or ≤ 30 mm for a stomach lesion or of any size for a BE-related or colorectal lesion, and with no lymphovascular invasion, and no budding grade 2 or 3 for colorectal lesions.ESGE recommends that, after an endoscopically complete resection, if there is a positive horizontal margin or if resection is piecemeal, but there is no submucosal invasion and no other high risk criteria are met, this should be considered a local-risk resection and endoscopic surveillance or re-treatment is recommended rather than surgery or other additional treatment.ESGE recommends that when there is a diagnosis of lymphovascular invasion, or deeper infiltration than sm1, or positive vertical margins, or undifferentiated tumor, or, for colorectal lesions, budding grade 2 or 3, this should be considered a high risk (noncurative) resection, and complete staging and strong consideration for additional treatments should be considered on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.ESGE recommends scheduled endoscopic surveillance with high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based) with biopsies of only the suspicious areas after a curative ESD.

Artificial Intelligence for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Roadmap from Technology Development to Clinical Practice

Stomach cancer is the third deadliest type of cancer in the world (0.86 million deaths in 2017). In 2035, a 20% increase will be observed both in incidence and mortality due to demographic effects if no interventions are foreseen. Upper GI endoscopy (UGIE) plays a paramount role in early diagnosis and, therefore, improved survival rates. On the other hand, human and technical factors can contribute to misdiagnosis while performing UGIE. In this scenario, artificial intelligence (AI) has recently shown its potential in compensating for the pitfalls of UGIE, by leveraging deep learning architectures able to efficiently recognize endoscopic patterns from UGIE video data. This work presents a review of the current state-of-the-art algorithms in the application of AI to gastroscopy. It focuses specifically on the threefold tasks of assuring exam completeness (i.e., detecting the presence of blind spots) and assisting in the detection and characterization of clinical findings, both gastric precancerous conditions and neoplastic lesion changes. Early and promising results have already been obtained using well-known deep learning architectures for computer vision, but many algorithmic challenges remain in achieving the vision of AI-assisted UGIE. Future challenges in the roadmap for the effective integration of AI tools within the UGIE clinical practice are discussed, namely the adoption of more robust deep learning architectures and methods able to embed domain knowledge into image/video classifiers as well as the availability of large, annotated datasets.

Best additional management after non-curative endoscopic resection of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic resection (ER) is an accepted first-line treatment for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), but when curative resection is not achieved, further treatment is not standardised. We aimed at evaluating outcomes of management strategies (esophagectomy, chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy (CRT/RT) or follow-up (FUP)) after a non-curative ESCC ER.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed evaluating outcomes of different management strategies after ESCC submitted to primary ER (T1a/T1b), without curative criteria (R1/Rx, T1a-m3/T1b, lymphovascular invasion (LVI) or poor differentiation). Primary outcomes included recurrence, overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Secondary outcomes consisted of treatment-related adverse events.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included for qualitative analysis (16 observational and 1 randomized controlled trial) including 788 patients with ESCC submitted to ER, managed by additional CRT/RT (n = 530), surgery (n = 98) or FUP (n = 160). Eight studies suited quantitative analysis. Patients only followed up after ER experienced recurrence rates of 0-36.4% (OR 3.6 (95%CI 1.06-12.20) vs further treatments). When submitted to CRT/RT following non-curative ER, recurrence was observed in 0-27.2% (OR 8.00 (95%CI 1.74-36.80) whereas after surgery no recurrence was noticeable. Reported 5 y-OS after CRT/RT for non-curative ER ranged among 75-100% whereas, for those offered surgeries, 5 y-OS was 89.5%. OS ranged between 54.5% and 100% after FUP. CRT/RT and surgery-related adverse events ranged from 0% to 32% and 14% to 28.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional treatment should be provided in ESCC after non-curative ER. Adjuvant esophagectomy might be the preferred treatment to medically fit patients with high-risk features (namely LVI). Properly designed trials assessing the role of CRT/RT are needed to manage these patients.

The future of endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer

Endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer is recommended when the risk of lymph node metastasis is negligible and should be performed through submucosal dissection due to well-established short- and long-term results. To overcome technical difficulties and decrease adverse events some techniques have been studied. This review outlines current strategies for improving patient selection and highlights innovative techniques that help minimize adverse events. Moreover, we discuss how to improve management after curative and noncurative resections.

Endoscopic Resection of Gastrointestinal Neuroendocrine Tumors: Long-Term Outcomes and Comparison of Endoscopic Techniques

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (GI-NETs) are being more frequently diagnosed and treated by endoscopic resection (ER) techniques. However, comparison studies of the different ER techniques or long-term outcomes are rarely reported. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> This was a single-center retrospective study analyzing short and long-term outcomes after ER of gastric, duodenum, and rectal GI-NETs. Comparison between standard EMR (sEMR), EMR with a cap (EMRc), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was made. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Fifty-three patients with GI-NET (25 gastric, 15 duodenal, and 13 rectal; sEMR = 21; EMRc = 19; ESD = 13) were included in the analysis. Median tumor size was 11 mm (range 4–20), significantly larger in the ESD and EMRc groups compared to the sEMR group (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.05). Complete ER was possible in all cases with 68% histological complete resection (no difference between the groups). Complication rate was significantly higher in the EMRc group (EMRc 32%, ESD 8%, and EMRs 0%, p = 0.01). Local recurrence occurred in only one patient, and systemic recurrence in 6%, with size ≥ 12 mm being a risk factor for systemic recurrence (p = 0.05). Specific disease-free survival after ER was 98%. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> ER is a safe and highly effective treatment particularly for less than 12 mm luminal GI-NETs. EMRc is associated with a high complication rate and should be avoided. sEMR is an easy and safe technique that is associated with long-term curability, and it is probably the best therapeutic option for most luminal GI-NETs. ESD appears to be the best option for lesions that cannot be resected en bloc with sEMR. Multicenter, prospective randomized trials should confirm these results.

Office-Based Procedures in the Management of Hemorrhoidal Disease: Rubber Band Ligation versus Sclerotherapy - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

The most frequently used office-based procedures in hemorrhoidal disease (HD) are rubber band ligation (RBL) and sclerotherapy. Few studies have been published comparing the various types of instrumental therapy. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of sclerotherapy and RBL.

Methods

Three online databases were searched. Efficacy (control of symptoms, prolapse, bleeding and pain, patients' satisfaction, and disease recurrence) and safety (complications, such as pain and bleeding) were the assessed outcomes. Pooled relative risks (RR) were computed for each outcome using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed by Cochran's Q test and I².

Results

Six RCTs and three cohort studies were included. Control of prolapse and bleeding was significantly higher with RBL (93.1% RBL vs. 66.4% sclerotherapy, RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.12-1.60 and 89.1% RBL vs. 78.7% SCL, RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.02-1.34, respectively). Both techniques had similar results in terms of pain relief, overall control of symptoms, and risk of recurrence at 3 months. Although patient satisfaction was significantly higher with RBL (77.8% RBL vs. 46.7% sclerotherapy, RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.01-2.50), post-procedural pain was significantly higher with this technique (24% RBL vs. 14% sclerotherapy, RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.32-2.28). There was no significant difference regarding post-procedure bleeding (11.1% RBL vs. 8.7% sclerotherapy, RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.86-1.94). In the subgroup analysis, according to the HD grade, post-procedure pain was higher with RBL only in HD grade II (vs. HD grade I-III).

Conclusions

RBL performs better than sclerotherapy in controlling HD symptoms, specifically prolapse and bleeding, although post-procedural pain is a frequent complication. Recurrence is similar with both procedures. While waiting for the publication of results with sclerotherapy with new sclerosants, RBL remains the office-based treatment of choice in HD.

Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management

Introduction

Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy is associated with high mortality and impaired quality of life.

Aim

The objective of this work was to determine the effectiveness of management of esophageal anastomotic leakage (EAL) after esophagectomy for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer.

Methods

Patients submitted to esophagectomy for esophageal and GEJ cancer at a tertiary oncology hospital between 2014 and 2019 (n = 119) were retrospectively reviewed and EAL risk factors and its management outcomes determined.

Results

Older age and nodal disease were identified as independent risk factors for anastomotic leak (adjusted OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00-1.13, and adjusted OR 4.89, 95% CI 1.09-21.8). Patients with EAL spent more days in the intensive care unit (ICU; median 14 vs. 4 days) and had higher 30-day mortality (15 vs. 2%) and higher in-hospital mortality (35 vs. 4%). The first treatment option was surgical in 13 patients, endoscopic in 10, and conservative in 3. No significant differences were noticeable between these patients, but sepsis and large leakages were tendentially managed by surgery. At follow-up, 3 patients in the surgery group (23%) and 9 in the endoscopic group (90%) were discharged under an oral diet (p = 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate was 38% in the surgical group, 33% in the conservative group, and 10% in endoscopic group (p = 0.132). In patients with EAL, the presence of septic shock at leak diagnosis was the only predictor of mortality (p = 0.004). ICU length-of-stay was non-significantly lower in the endoscopic therapy group (median 4 days, vs. 16 days in the surgical group, p = 0.212).

Conclusion

Risk factors for EAL may help change pre-procedural optimization. The results of this study suggest including an endoscopic approach for EAL.

Improving the Diagnosis and Treatment of Early Gastric Cancer in the West

Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death. In Western countries, its lower prevalence and the absence of mass screening programmes contribute to late diagnosis and a slower implementation of minimally invasive treatments. A secondary prevention strategy through endoscopic surveillance of patients at high risk of intestinal-type gastric adenocarcinoma or by screening gastric cancer within colorectal screening programmes is cost-effective in intermediate-risk countries, though the identification of these patients remains challenging. Virtual chromoendoscopy with narrow-band imaging improves the accuracy of endoscopic diagnosis, significantly increasing the sensitivity for intestinal metaplasia while preserving specificity. Endoscopic grading of gastric intestinal metaplasia is feasible, correlates well with histological staging systems and also with gastric neoplasia risk and can be used to stratify risk. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the West achieves efficacy and safety outcomes similar to those reported for Eastern countries, and the long-term disease-specific survival is higher than 95%. A prospective comparative study with gastrectomy confirms its higher safety and its benefits concerning health-related quality of life. However, ESD is associated with a 5% risk of postprocedural bleeding and a 20% risk of non-curative resection. The knowledge of risk factors for adverse events and non-curative resection can improve patient selection. The risk of metachronous lesions after ESD is high (3–5% per year), and endoscopic surveillance is needed. The management of patients with non-curative resection can be optimized using risk scoring systems for lymph node metastasis.

Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Gastrointestinal Tract: A Focused Review and Practical Approach for Gastroenterologists

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare tumors derived from the neuroendocrine cell system, and more commonly found in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Over the last decades, the incidence of GI-NETs has been steadily increasing, partly due to the expanding indications for endoscopy. Most patients with NETs are asymptomatic, and their NETs are noticed during screening examinations; thus, endoscopists are on the frontline of the diagnosis of GI-NETs. Since GI-NETs are less frequent than other malignancies, the natural history, diagnosis, and management of these tumors may not be fully understood. In this review, we aim to update the endoscopist on key clinical features and management of patients with gastric, duodenal, and rectal NETs.

COVID-19 in gastroenterology: Where are we now? Current evidence on the impact of COVID-19 in gastroenterology

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has created unprecedented challenges in all fields of society with social, economic, and health-related consequences worldwide. In this context, gastroenterology patients and healthcare systems and professionals have seen their routines changed and were forced to adapt, adopting measures to minimize the risk of infection while guaranteeing continuous medical care to chronic patients.

OBJECTIVE

At this point, it is important to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on this field to further improve the quality of the services provided in this context.

METHODS/RESULTS/CONCLUSION

We performed a literature review that summarizes the main aspects to consider in gastroenterology, during the pandemic crisis, and includes a deep discussion on the main changes affecting gastroenterology patients and healthcare systems, anticipating the pandemic recovery scenario with future practices and policies.

Indications and outcomes of endoscopic resection for non-pedunculated colorectal lesions: A narrative review

In the last years, endoscopic techniques gained a crucial role in the treatment of colorectal flat lesions. At the same time, the importance of a reliable assessment of such lesions to predict the malignancy and the depth of invasion of the colonic wall emerged. The current unsolved dilemma about the endoscopic excision techniques concerns the necessity of a reliable submucosal invasive cancer assessment system that can stratify the risk of the post-procedural need for surgery. Accordingly, this narrative literature review aims to compare the available diagnostic strategies in predicting malignancy and to give a guide about the best techniques to employ. We performed a literature search using electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library). We collected all articles about endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) registering the outcomes. Moreover, we analyzed all meta-analyses comparing EMR vs ESD outcomes for colorectal sessile or non-polypoid lesions of any size, preoperatively estimated as non-invasive. Seven meta-analysis studies, mainly Eastern, were included in the analysis comparing 124 studies and overall 22954 patients who underwent EMR and ESD procedures. Of these, eighty-two were retrospective, twenty-four perspective, nine case-control, and six cohorts, while three were randomized clinical trials. A total of 18118 EMR and 10379 ESD were completed for a whole of 28497 colorectal sessile or non-polypoid lesions > 5-10 mm in size. In conclusion, it is crucial to enhance the preoperative diagnostic workup, especially in deciding the most suitable endoscopic method for radical resection of flat colorectal lesions at risk of underlying malignancy. Additionally, the ESD necessitates further improvement because of the excessively time-consuming as well as the intraprocedural technical hindrances and related complications. We found a higher rate of en bloc resections and R0 for ESD than EMR for non-pedunculated colorectal lesions. Nevertheless, despite the lower local recurrence rates, ESD had greater perforation rates and needed lengthier procedural times. The prevailing risk for additional surgery in ESD rather than EMR for complications or oncologic reasons is still uncertain.

Cold versus hot polypectomy/endoscopic mucosal resection-A review of current evidence

Background

Colonoscopy with polypectomy substantially reduces the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) but interval cancers still account for 9% of all CRCs, some of which are due to incomplete resection.

Aim

The aim of this review is to compare the outcomes of cold and hot endoscopic resection and provide technical tips and tricks for optimizing cold snare polypectomy.

Results

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is the standard technique for small (≤10 mm) colorectal polyps. For large colonic polyps (>10 mm), hot resection techniques with use of electrocautery (polypectomy or endoscopic mucosal resection) were recommended until recently. However, the use of electrocoagulation brings serious adverse effects in up to 9% of the patients, such as delayed bleeding, post‐polypectomy syndrome and perforation. In recent years, efforts have been made to improve the polypectomy with cold snare in order to avoid these adverse effects of electrocoagulation without compromising the efficacy of the resection. Several authors have recently shown that the complication rates of CSP of polyps >10 mm is close to zero and recurrence rates varies between 5‐18%. Lower recurrence rates are found in serrated lesions (<8%).

Original Article: MicroRNA Dysregulation in the Gastric Carcinogenesis Cascade: Can We Anticipate Its Role in Individualized Care?

BACKGROUND

Gastric carcinogenesis progresses from normal mucosa, atrophic/metaplastic gastritis, and dysplasia to adenocarcinoma. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) regulate DNA expression and have been implicated; however, their role is not fully established.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to characterize plasma and tissue expression of several miRNAs in gastric carcinogenesis stages.

METHODS

Single-center cross-sectional study in 64 patients: 19 controls (normal mucosa); 15 with extensive atrophic/metaplastic gastritis; and 30 with early gastric neoplasia (EGN). Seven miRNAs (miR-21, miR-146a, miR-181b, miR-370, miR-375, miR 181b, and miR-490) were quantified by real time-qPCR in peripheral blood and endoscopic biopsy samples.

RESULTS

We found a significant upregulation of miR-181b, miR-490, and miR-21 in the EGN mucosa (overexpression 2-14-times higher than controls). We observed a significant underexpression of miR-146a and miR-370 in atrophic/metaplastic gastritis (86 and 66% decrease, p = 0.008 and p = 0.001) and in EGN (89 and 62% reduction, p = 0.034 and p = 0.032) compared with controls. There were no differences between lesions and nonneoplastic mucosa and no dysregulation of plasma miRNAs.

CONCLUSION

We found significant dysregulation of 5 miRNAs in gastric carcinogenesis, suggesting a tumor suppressor role for miR-146a and miR-370 and oncogenic potential for miR-21, miR-181, and miR-490. These changes happen diffusely in the gastric mucosa, suggesting a high-risk field defect, which may influence these patients' surveillance.

Gastric microbiome profile throughout gastric carcinogenesis: beyond helicobacter

BACKGROUND

Gastric dysbiosis has been hinted as a potential cause of gastric cancer. However, changes in microbiome throughout the major stages of gastric carcinogenesis remain mostly unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To describe gastric microbiome at different stages, analysing for the first time dysbiosis specifically in patients with early gastric cancer (EGC).

METHODS

Cross-sectional study including patients (n = 77) with endoscopically and histologically confirmed normal stomachs (controls; n = 25), advanced atrophic gastritis with intestinal metaplasia (IM; n = 18) and EGC (n = 34). Endoscopic biopsies from antrum and corpus (n = 154) were analyzed. Next-generation sequencing was performed characterizing microbial communities down to the species level based on full-length 16SrRNA gene profiling.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found in the microbiome profile between the groups. Firmicutes were more frequent (p = .012) and Proteobacteria were less frequent (p = .04) both in the IM and EGC when comparing to controls. Relative frequency of Helicobacter pylori, when present, was much higher in the controls (83%) when comparing to the other groups (IM 1%, EGC 27%; p = .006), being the dominant bacteria only in the controls. Dysbiosis was present already and more significantly at the IM stage, with two bacteria progressively increasing from controls to IM then to cancer: Gemella from 1.48 to 3.9% (p = .014); and Streptococcus from 19.3 to 33.7% (p = .04), being the EGC dominant bacteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm Helicobacter pylori dominancy in non-atrophic stomachs and progressive dysbiosis throughout gastric carcinogenesis. Gemella but particularly Streptococcus is significantly increased in patients with EGC. Specific modulation of these bacteria may change gastric cancer risk.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD): how do Western endoscopists value animal models?

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD)was introduced in the West later than in the East. Our aim was to assess how Western endoscopists performing ESD have been trained and how they value animal models for training.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An online survey regarding training in ESD was sent to Western endoscopists who published articles on advanced resection techniques.

RESULTS

From 279 endoscopists, 58 (21%) completed the questionnaire, of which 50 confirmed performance of clinical ESD. Endoscopists had a median of 15 years of endoscopic experience (IQR 9.75-20.25) and all of them were performing conventional EMR, before starting ESD. Prior to clinical ESD, 74% (n = 37) underwent training with ex vivo models, 84% (n = 42) with live animal models and 92% (n = 46) with at least, one of the two models. After starting clinical ESD, as trainers, 52% (n = 26) were involved with ex vivo and 60% (n = 30) with live animal models. Personal usefulness of ex vivo and live animal models was rated with a median of 9 (IQR 8-10) and 10 (IQR 8-10), out of 10, respectively. Courses with ex vivo and live animal models were considered a prerequisite before clinical practice by 84% (n = 42) and 78% (n = 39), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Western endoscopists have extensive endoscopic experience before starting ESD. The majority had pre-clinical training with ex vivo and live animal models and more than half are acting as trainers of other endoscopists with these models. Animal models are considered very useful and deemed a prerequisite before clinical practice by the majority of the endoscopists.

Covered Metal Stent after Dysfunction of Uncovered Stents for Palliation of Gastrointestinal Malignant Obstruction

Background

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been used for the palliative treatment of malignant gastrointestinal tract obstruction. However, restenosis or incomplete expansion of a first stent is a frequent complication, and the effectiveness of reintervention with placement of a second stent is still controversial.

Objective

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of covered SEMS (cSEMS) placement after dysfunction of uncovered SEMS (uSEMS) by the stent-in-stent technique.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively studied a consecutive series of patients receiving palliative treatment for malignant gastrointestinal obstruction with cSEMS placement after uSEMS dysfunction in a tertiary center from January 2013 to August 2018. Technical and clinical success, time of patency, and adverse events were analyzed.

Results

Twelve patients were included; their mean age was 60 ± 9 years. Eleven patients had gastric outlet obstruction, and 1 patient had compression of the transverse colon due to gastric neoplasia. In 5 cases, there was absence of early clinical success with uSEMS and stent dysfunction in 7 cases (median patency time: 81 days). There was 100% technical success and 91.7% clinical success after cSEMS placement. There were no adverse events nor need for reintervention. The median patency time after placement of both stents was 163 days (vs. 71 days with the initial stent).

Conclusion

cSEMS placement after uSEMS dysfunction is technically feasible and a clinically effective treatment for patients with recurrent malignant gastrointestinal obstruction, with good stent patency in the medium/long term. This approach seems to be safe and without increase in adverse effects.

Image-enhanced endoscopy for gastric preneoplastic conditions and neoplastic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND : Image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) improves the accuracy of endoscopic diagnosis. We aimed to assess the value of IEE for gastric preneoplastic conditions and neoplastic lesions. METHODS : Medline and Embase were searched until December 2018. Studies allowing calculation of diagnostic measures were included. Risk of bias and applicability were assessed using QUADAS-2. Subgroup analysis was performed to explore heterogeneity. RESULTS : 44 studies met the inclusion criteria. For gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM), narrow-band imaging (NBI) obtained a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.79 (95 %CI 0.72-0.85) and 0.91 (95 %CI 0.88-0.94) on per-patient basis; on per-biopsy basis, it was 0.84 (95 %CI 0.81-0.86) and 0.95 (95 %CI 0.94-0.96), respectively. Tubulovillous pattern was the most accurate marker to detect GIM and it was effectively assessed without high magnification. For dysplasia, NBI showed a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.87 (95 %CI 0.84-0.89) and 0.97 (95 %CI 0.97-0.98) on per-biopsy basis. The use of magnification improved the performance of NBI to characterize early gastric cancer (EGC), especially when the vessel plus surface (VS) classification was applied. Regarding other technologies, trimodal imaging also obtained a high accuracy for dysplasia (sensitivity 0.93 [95 %CI 0.85-0.98], specificity 0.98 [95 %CI 0.92-1.00]). For atrophic gastritis, no specific pattern was noted and none of the technologies reached good diagnostic yield. CONCLUSION : NBI is highly accurate for GIM and dysplasia. The presence of tubulovillous pattern and the VS classification seem to be useful to detect GIM and characterize EGC, respectively. These features should be used in current practice and to standardize endoscopic criteria for other technologies.

Endoscopic grading of gastric intestinal metaplasia on risk assessment for early gastric neoplasia: can we replace histology assessment also in the West?

OBJECTIVES

To assess the value of endoscopic grading of gastric intestinal metaplasia (EGGIM), operative link on gastritis assessment (OLGA) and operative link on gastric intestinal metaplasia (OLGIM) on risk stratification for early gastric neoplasia (EGN) and to investigate other factors possibly associated with its development.

DESIGN

Single centre, case-control study including 187 patients with EGN treated endoscopically and 187 age-matched and sex-matched control subjects. Individuals were classified according to EGGIM, OLGA and OLGIM systems. EGN risk according to gastritis stages and other clinical parameters was further evaluated.

RESULTS

More patients with EGN had EGGIM of ≥5 than control subjects (68.6% vs 13.3%, p<0.001). OLGA and OLGIM stages III/IV were more prevalent in patients with EGN than in control subjects (68% vs 11%, p<0.001, and 61% vs 3%, p<0.001, respectively). The three systems were the only parameters significantly related to the risk of EGN in multivariate analysis: for EGGIM 1-4 (adjusted OR (AOR) 12.9, 95% CI 1.4 to 118.6) and EGGIM 5-10 (AOR 21.2, 95% CI 5.0 to 90.2); for OLGA I/II (AOR 5.0, 95% CI 0.56 to 44.5) and OLGA III/IV (AOR 11.1, 95% CI 3.7 to 33.1); for OLGIM I/II (AOR 11.5, 95% CI 4.1 to 32.3) and OLGIM III/IV (AOR 16.0, 95% CI 7.6 to 33.4).

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the role of histological assessment as an independent risk factor for gastric cancer (GC), but it is the first study to show that an endoscopic classification of gastric intestinal metaplasia is highly associated with that outcome. After further prospective validation, this classification may be appropriate for GC risk stratification and may simplify every day practice by reducing the need for biopsies.