Virtual Gastroenterology Fellowship Recruitment During COVID-19 and Its Implications for the Future

This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.Background and Aims Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, medical education organizations endorsed a virtual recruitment format, representing a stark change from traditional in-person interviews. We aimed to identify the attitudes and perceptions of Gastroenterology Fellowship Program Directors (PDs) and applicants regarding the virtual interview experience and the role of virtual interviews (VI) in the future. Methods We designed separate surveys targeting PDs and applicants using the Qualtrics software. At the end of the interview season, we e-mailed both survey links to all PDs and requested that they forward the applicant survey to their interviewed candidates. Surveys were voluntary and anonymous. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data with results presented as percentages. Results A total of 29.7% of PDs completed the survey. Compared to traditional interviews, VI were viewed by 46.5% of PDs to be very suboptimal or suboptimal. Yet, 69.1% envisioned a role for VI in the future. A total of 14.2% of applicants completed the survey. Compared to traditional interviews, VI were viewed by 42.3% of applicants to be very suboptimal or suboptimal. However, 61.8% saw a future role for VI. While both applicants and PDs reported that establishing an interpersonal connection was a disadvantage with VI, applicants placed more emphasis on this need for connection (p = 0.001). Conclusion Overall, PDs and applicants report mixed views with regard to VI but anticipate that it may continue to have a future role. VI may augment future recruitment cycles with care taken to not disadvantage applicants, who rely heavily on the interview process to create personal connections with programs

Mucosal inflammation, esophageal eosinophilia and celiac disease; A little “pinch” will have to do you

When a mucosal surface is injured, inflammatory responses ensue. These responses are characterized by the well-orchestrated accumulation of reparative leukocytes that protect and heal the mucosa during a process that often goes unrecognized. Under other circumstances, genetically predisposed hosts encounter exogenous or endogenous triggers that lead to pathological inflammation, tissue damage, and organ dysfunction. The gastrointestinal tract is the target site for this process in a number of diseases, including inflammatory bowel diseases, celiac disease, and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE)..

Eosinophilic Esophagitis - Pathophysiology and its Clinical Implications

Eosinophilic Esophagitis is an antigen mediated chronic disease that is distinct from gastroesophageal reflux disease. EoE an emerging clinical problem that is rapidly growing in incidence and in recognition. It is characterized clinically by feeding dysfunction, dysphagia and reflux-like symptoms. Histologically EoE is identifiable by a dense epithelial eosinophilic infiltrate. Experimental modeling and clinical studies over the last decade have greatly improved our understanding of this disease and led to improvements in clinical understanding and the assessment of therapeutic options for patients and their clinicians who manage this disease. In this review we review the cliniopathologic diagnostic criteria and our understanding of EoE as an allergic disease with genetic and immunological components in the pathophysiology. We make note of the berth of studies defining the importance of the epithelial barrier and discuss the concept of barrier function as an initiating or perpetuating factor for this disease. The relationship between the symptoms of dysphagia, feeding dysfunction and our current knowledge of the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms of these clinical indicators, as well as advances in clinical assessment of decreased esophageal distensibility and narrowing in EoE patients. Lastly, therapeutic implications relating to the advances that have led to our current understanding of the pathophysiology of EoE are explored

Heterogeneity of Intestinal Tissue Eosinophils: Potential Considerations for Next-Generation Eosinophil-Targeting Strategies

Eosinophils are implicated in the pathophysiology of a spectrum of eosinophil-associated diseases, including gastrointestinal eosinophilic diseases (EGIDs). Biologics that target the IL-5 pathway and are intended to ablate eosinophils have proved beneficial in severe eosinophilic asthma and may offer promise in treating some endotypes of EGIDs. However, destructive effector functions of eosinophils are only one side of the coin; eosinophils also play important roles in immune and tissue homeostasis. A growing body of data suggest tissue eosinophils represent a plastic and heterogeneous population of functional sub-phenotypes, shaped by environmental (systemic and local) pressures, which may differentially impact disease outcomes. This may be particularly relevant to the GI tract, wherein the highest density of eosinophils reside in the steady state, resident immune cells are exposed to an especially broad range of external and internal environmental pressures, and greater eosinophil longevity may uniquely enrich for co-expression of eosinophil sub-phenotypes. Here we review the growing evidence for functional sub-phenotypes of intestinal tissue eosinophils, with emphasis on the multifactorial pressures that shape and diversify eosinophil identity and potential targets to inform next-generation eosinophil-targeting strategies designed to restrain inflammatory eosinophil functions while sustaining homeostatic roles

Ultrastructural features of eosinophilic oesophagitis: impact of treatment on desmosomes

Aims—A growing body of evidence suggests a role for altered epithelial barrier function in the pathophysiology of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE), but few have described the epithelial structure during inflammation. The purpose of this study was to define ultrastructural features of active, inactive EoE and control subject’s oesophageal epithelia. Methods—We prospectively enrolled patients undergoing diagnostic upper endoscopy for evaluation of EoE. Mucosal pinch biopsies were obtained from the distal oesophagus and processed for routine histology and electron microscopic assessment. Clinical features of enrolled subjects were analysed and subjects were divided into four groups: normal, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), inactive EoE and active EoE. Representative photomicrographs of the basal and superficial epithelia were reviewed for abnormalities. Desmosomes were quantified on the surface of epithelia three to four prickle-cell layers above the basal layer. Results—Twenty-nine paediatric cases (ages 2–18 years) were enrolled in the study. We observed a significant decrease in the number of desmosomes per cell (DPC) of subjects with active EoE compared with inactive EoE, GERD and normal epithelia. With respect to DPC, no significant differences were found between inactive EoE compared with GERD or normal subjects. Additional ultrastructural features observed included epithelial microplicae and evidence of eosinophil transmigration, degranulation, and sombrero formation. Conclusions—Consistent with clinical and molecular findings, our ultrastructural data provide support for an altered oesophageal barrier in paediatric cases with active EoE, which may improve following treatmen

AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Personalized Approach to the Evaluation and Management of GERD: Expert Review

Background & aimsAs many as one-half of all patients with suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) do not derive benefit from acid suppression. This review outlines a personalized diagnostic and therapeutic approach to GERD symptoms.MethodsThe Best Practice Advice statements presented here were developed from expert review of existing literature combined with extensive discussion and expert opinion to provide practical advice. Formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of recommendations was not the intent of this clinical practice update. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Clinicians should develop a care plan for investigation of symptoms suggestive of GERD, selection of therapy (with explanation of potential risks and benefits), and long-term management, including possible de-escalation, in a shared-decision making model with the patient. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Clinicians should provide standardized educational material on GERD mechanisms, weight management, lifestyle and dietary behaviors, relaxation strategies, and awareness about the brain-gut axis relationship to patients with reflux symptoms. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Clinicians should emphasize safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the treatment of GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Clinicians should provide patients presenting with troublesome heartburn, regurgitation, and/or non-cardiac chest pain without alarm symptoms a 4- to 8-week trial of single-dose PPI therapy. With inadequate response, dosing can be increased to twice a day or switched to a more effective acid suppressive agent once a day. When there is adequate response, PPI should be tapered to the lowest effective dose. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: If PPI therapy is continued in a patient with unproven GERD, clinicians should evaluate the appropriateness and dosing within 12 months after initiation, and offer endoscopy with prolonged wireless reflux monitoring off PPI therapy to establish appropriateness of long-term PPI therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: If troublesome heartburn, regurgitation, and/or non-cardiac chest pain do not respond adequately to a PPI trial or when alarm symptoms exist, clinicians should investigate with endoscopy and, in the absence of erosive reflux disease (Los Angeles B or greater) or long-segment (≥3 cm) Barrett's esophagus, perform prolonged wireless pH monitoring off medication (96-hour preferred if available) to confirm and phenotype GERD or to rule out GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Complete endoscopic evaluation of GERD symptoms includes inspection for erosive esophagitis (graded according to the Los Angeles classification when present), diaphragmatic hiatus (Hill grade of flap valve), axial hiatus hernia length, and inspection for Barrett's esophagus (graded according to the Prague classification and biopsied when present). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Clinicians should perform upfront objective reflux testing off medication (rather than an empiric PPI trial) in patients with isolated extra-esophageal symptoms and suspicion for reflux etiology. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: In symptomatic patients with proven GERD, clinicians should consider ambulatory 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring on PPI as an option to determine the mechanism of persisting esophageal symptoms despite therapy (if adequate expertise exists for interpretation). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Clinicians should personalize adjunctive pharmacotherapy to the GERD phenotype, in contrast to empiric use of these agents. Adjunctive agents include alginate antacids for breakthrough symptoms, nighttime H2 receptor antagonists for nocturnal symptoms, baclofen for regurgitation or belch predominant symptoms, and prokinetics for coexistent gastroparesis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Clinicians should provide pharmacologic neuromodulation, and/or referral to a behavioral therapist for hypnotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, diaphragmatic breathing, and relaxation strategies in patients with functional heartburn or reflux disease associated with esophageal hypervigilance reflux hypersensitivity and/or behavioral disorders. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: In patients with proven GERD, laparoscopic fundoplication and magnetic sphincter augmentation are effective surgical options, and transoral incisionless fundoplication is an effective endoscopic option in carefully selected patients. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: In patients with proven GERD, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is an effective primary anti-reflux intervention in obese patients, and a salvage option in non-obese patients, whereas sleeve gastrectomy has potential to worsen GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Candidacy for invasive anti-reflux procedures includes confirmatory evidence of pathologic GERD, exclusion of achalasia, and assessment of esophageal peristaltic function