The prospective validation of a scoring system to assess mucosal cleanliness during upper endoscopy (EGD)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cleanliness of the mucosa of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract is critical for performing a high-quality esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). The aim of this study was to validate a recently developed UGI cleanliness scale (the PEACE system) in the detection of clinically significant lesions (CSL) in the UGI tract.

METHODS

Patients who underwent a complete diagnostic EGD were prospectively enrolled between August 2021 to October 2022. The UGI tract (esophagus, stomach, and duodenum) cleanliness was scored 0-3 for each segment. The primary outcomes were the detection of CSL and PEACE scores.

RESULTS

Of 995 patients enrolled from 5 centers in the study adequate cleanliness (AQ; all scores of >2) was found in 929 patients. In multivariate regression analysis, AQ was associated with the number of diagnosed CSLs (OR 1.78 95% CI 1.06-3.01, p=0.03). Other factors related with CSL detection were: duration of EGD (OR 1.29 95% CI 1.23-1.35, p<0.001), male gender (OR 1.33 95% CI 1.04-1.71, p=0.025), and EGD indication (dyspepsia, alarm symptoms, gastritis surveillance, other indications vs GERD) (OR 0.43 95% CI 0.31-0.6, p<0.001; OR 0.44 95% CI 0.28-0.67, p<0.001; OR 0.44 95% CI 0.25-0.76, p=0.004 and OR 0.44 95% CI 0.31-0.62, p<0.001 respectively). 27 patients were diagnosed with UGI neoplasia - all in patients with adequate cleanliness of the UGI tract.

CONCLUSIONS

Adequate cleanliness of the UGI tract as assessed with the PEACE system was associated with a significantly higher detection rate of CSLs during EGD. The relationship of this scale with UGI neoplasia detection warrants further investigation.

Heterotopic Gastric Mucosa in the Proximal Esophagus: Prospective Study and Systematic Review on Relationships with Endoscopic Findings and Clinical Data

Cervical inlet patches (CIP) are common endoscopic findings with uncertain pathogenesis and clinical significance. We aimed to perform a systematic review and prospective study of clinical data and endoscopic findings related to CIP. It was a prospective single-center study conducted between 10/01/2017 and 9/01/2018. Forty patients with histopathologically confirmed CIP were compared with 222 individuals in the reference group. The systematic review was executed in accordance with the PRISMA guideline. Alcohol consumption tended to be higher among patients with CIP (3.0 ± 4.6 vs. 1.9 ± 5.0 standard drinks/week CIP patients and reference group, respectively; p < 0.001). Dysphagia was more frequent among patients with CIP (25% vs. 1.4%, CIP patients and reference group, respectively; p < 0.001), and sore throat and hoarseness were less frequent in patients with CIP (17.5% vs. 26.6% CIP patients and reference group, respectively; p < 0.01). In the multivariate regression analysis, the only risk factor of CIP occurrence was dysphagia (OR 21.9, 95%CI 4.9-98.6; p < 0.001). Sore throat and hoarseness were a reverse-risk factor of CIP diagnosis (OR 0.3, 95%CI 0.1-0.93; p = 0.04). Clinical data and coexisting endoscopic findings were not related to CIP. In the presented study, dysphagia was related to CIP occurrence, and sore throat and hoarseness tended to be less frequent among patients with CIP.

The relation of esophagogastroduodenoscopy time and novel upper gastrointestinal quality measures

OBJECTIVES

Various measures of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) quality have been proposed so far and the examination time was one of the first. The aim of the study was to compare the procedure time with novel novel quality measures - composite detection rate (CDR) and endoscopist biopsy rate (EBR).

METHODS

It was prospective observational study. A total of 880 diagnostic EGDs conducted from 01.2019 to 07.2019 have been enrolled in the study.

RESULTS

Median EGD time was 4.2 min. Procedures of longer duration were marked with higher CDR (26.3% vs. 11.8%; P < 0.0001), higher EBR (44.9% vs. 12.3%; P < 0.0001), and better upper gastrointestinal neoplasm (UGN) detection (1.8% vs. 0%; P = 0.004) in comparison with procedures of shorter duration. The procedures were divided into 4 groups based on the time quartiles (group 1 <3.3 min; group 2 3.3-4.2 min; group 3 4.2-5.3 min; group 4 >5.3 min). The odds ratios of groups 2, 3, and 4 for biopsy rate were 2.42 (95% CI, 1.33-4.55), 4.33 (95% CI, 2.46-7.94), and 5.51 (95% CI, 3.18-10.03), respectively, in comparison with group 1. The odds ratios of groups 2, 3, and 4 for CDR were 3.18 (95% CI, 2.03-4.97), 5.46 (95% CI, 3.51-8.50), and 23.44 (95% CI, 14.3-38.4), respectively, in comparison with group 1.

CONCLUSIONS

The procedure time is related to novel metrics - CDR and EBR. It is also related to UGN. Based on our findings it could be concluded that EGD should not last less than 4.2 min.

Influence of narrow-band imaging (NBI) and enhanced operator's attention during esophagus inspection on cervical inlet patches detection

PURPOSE

Heterotopic gastric mucosa in the upper esophagus (cervical inlet patches - CIP) may be easily missed during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) due to low awareness of this usually, but not invariably, benign lesion. Narrow-band imaging (NBI) emphasizes contrast between normal esophageal mucosa and CIP. The purpose of this study was to investigate how NBI use and enhanced attention of operator during inspection of upper esophagus impacts cervical inlet patch detection rate (CIPDR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a prospective, randomized study in which we enrolled 1000 patients, qualified for diagnostic EGD. The trial was divided into two parts; the first, when 6 operators performed EGD with standard attention (SA), and the second, when the same operators were asked to step up with attention at CIP (enhanced attention - EA). In both parts of the study, patients were randomized to NBI and white light endoscopy (WLE) in 1:1 ratio. The study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT03015571).

RESULTS

Differences in CIPDR between WLE and NBI in SA and EA were not statistically different (5.6% vs 7.6%; p ​= ​0.3, and 7.6% vs 11.6%; p ​= ​0.1, respectively). In multivariate regression analysis, the only factors improving CIPDR were NBI with EA (NBI_EA, OR 3.31; 95%CI 1.57-6.98; p ​= ​0.003) and sedation (OR 1.97; 95%CI 1.27-3.05; p ​= ​0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of NBI combined with EA significantly improves CIPDR.