Manometric pattern progression in esophageal achalasia in the era of high-resolution manometry

none9Esophageal manometry represents the gold standard technique for the diagnosis of esophageal achalasia because it can detect both the lack of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxation and abnormal peristalsis. From the manometric standpoint, cases of achalasia can be segregated on the grounds of three clinically relevant patterns according to the Chicago Classification v3.0. It is currently unclear whether they represent distinct entities or are part of a disease continuum with the possibility of transition from a pattern to another one. The four cases described in the present report could provide further insights on this topic because the manometric pattern changed from type III to type II in all patients-without any invasive treatment. The cases described here support the hypothesis that the different manometric patterns of achalasia represent different stages in the evolution of the same disease, type III being the early stage, type II an intermediate stage, and type I probably the end stage of achalasia.mixedSalvador, Renato; Costantini, Mario; Tolone, Salvatore; Familiari, Pietro; Galliani, Ermenegildo; Germanà, Bastianello; Savarino, Edoardo; Merigliano, Stefano; Valmasoni, MicheleSalvador, Renato; Costantini, Mario; Tolone, Salvatore; Familiari, Pietro; Galliani, Ermenegildo; Germanà, Bastianello; Savarino, Edoardo; Merigliano, Stefano; Valmasoni, Michel

Safety in digestive endoscopy procedures in the covid era: recommendations in progress of the Italian Society od Digestive Endoscopy

The new corona virus disease has started in Wuhan - China at the end of 2019 and quickly spread with a pandemic trend across the rest of the world. The scientific community is making an extraordinary effort to study and control the situation, but the results are just partial. Based on the most recent scientific literature and strong statements by the most prestigious international health institutions, the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy has drawn up some recommendations about the use of personal protective equipment, the correct way of dressing and undressing of endoscopists and nurses, before and after digestive endoscopy procedures. In addition, some other important indications are given to reduce the risk of contamination of healthcare providers during endoscopic activities, in the setting of a pandemic. Nevertheless, because of the very quick evolution of our knowledge on this issue, these recommendations must be considered as evolving, because they could change in a short time. © 2020 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l

Quality performance measures in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for lesion detection: Italian AIGO-SIED-SIGE joint position statement

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) plays a crucial role in the management of gastroduodenal diseases by allowing a direct and accurate evaluation of the mucosa and the execution of several operative ma-neuvers. Despite a constant development of new imaging tools and operative devices, the widespread use of EGD has not resulted in a significant reduction of mortality for patients affected by esophageal/gastric cancer during the last three decades in Western countries.Evidence indicates that this disheartening scenario derives from a high variability of execution of EGD which determines its quality and diagnostic yield, delaying the diagnosis of neoplastic diseases. Based on this evidence, in recent years many scientific societies have produced different position pa-pers aimed at defining quality performance measures in EGD.Thus, the Italian Association of Gastroenterologists and Endoscopists, the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy and the Italian Society of Gastroenterology have produced this joint document based on the review of ASGE, ACG, BSG, ESGE and Asian Consensus EGD position papers with the aim of indicating the quality standards of EGD (pre-, intra-and post-procedure) focused on lesion detection to be adopted in the Italian context.(c) 2022 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Different doses of omeprazole in the maintenance treatment of patients with peptic ulcers resistant to H2-blockers

A 6-month, open, randomized study was performed to evaluate different dosage regimens for maintenance therapy with omeprazole in patients refractory to treatment with standard histamine2(H2)-blockers. One hundred two patients with gastric and/or duodenal ulcers, unhealed after 8 weeks of full-dose H2-antagonist treatment but healed after a further 4 to 8 weeks of omeprazole 20-40 mg/d, were randomized into four treatment groups: omeprazole 20 mg once daily (group A), omeprazole 20 mg every other day (group B), omeprazole 20 mg twice weekly (group C), and ranitidine 150 mg at bedtime (control). Endoscopic and clinical examinations were performed at 3 and 6 months and at every symptomatic relapse. Eleven patients dropped out for reasons of noncompliance. Relapses were detected in 14.8% of 27 cases in group A, 19.4% of 31 cases in group B, 42.9% of 21 cases in group C, and 66.7% of 12 controls. The better outcomes in groups A and B, as compared with group C and the control group were statistically significant. These findings confirm the efficacy of omeprazole in maintenance therapy for refractory ulcers and suggest that drug administration should be daily or every other day, as twice-weekly dosages are less effective. © 1994 Excerpta Medica, Inc. All rights reserved

Adenoma detection by Endocuff-assisted versus standard colonoscopy in an organized screening program: the "ItaVision" randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: The Endocuff Vision device (Arc Medical Design Ltd., Leeds, UK) has been shown to increase mucosal exposure, and consequently adenoma detection rate (ADR), during colonoscopy. This nationwide multicenter study assessed possible benefits and harms of using Endocuff Vision in a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening program. METHODS: Patients undergoing colonoscopy after a FIT-positive test were randomized 1:1 to undergo Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy or standard colonoscopy, stratified by sex, age, and screening history. Primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR stratified by endoscopists' ADR, advanced ADR (AADR), adenomas per colonoscopy (APC), withdrawal time, and adverse events. RESULTS: 1866 patients were enrolled across 13 centers. After exclusions, 1813 (mean age 60.1 years; male 53.8 %) were randomized (908 Endocuff Vision, 905 standard colonoscopy). ADR was significantly higher in the Endocuff Vision arm (47.8 % vs. 40.8 %; relative risk [RR] 1.17, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.30), with no differences between arms regarding size or morphology. When stratifying for endoscopists' ADR, only low detectors (ADR < 33.3 %) showed a statistically significant ADR increase (Endocuff Vision 41.1 % [95 %CI 35.7-46.7] vs. standard colonoscopy 26.0 % [95 %CI 21.3-31.4]). AADR (24.8 % vs. 20.5 %, RR 1.21, 95 %CI 1.02-1.43) and APC (0.94 vs. 0.77; P  = 0.001) were higher in the Endocuff Vision arm. Withdrawal time and adverse events were similar between arms. CONCLUSION: Endocuff Vision increased ADR in a FIT-based screening program by improvingexamination of the whole colonic mucosa. Utility was highest among endoscopists with a low ADR

Effect of Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-1572 on symptoms, gut microbiota, short chain fatty acids, and immune activation in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: A pilot randomized clinical trial

Background: Evidence suggests a role of intestinal microbiota-host interactions in the pathophysiology and symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Objective: The objective of this article is to assess the effects of Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-1572 on clinical and gut microbiota-related factors in IBS. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, cross-over, 18-week, placebo-controlled, pilot trial assessing the effect of Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-1572 on symptoms, gut microbiota composition, fecal short chain fatty acid (SCFA), immunoglobulin A, and cytokines in IBS. The intestinal microbial ecosystem was characterized by 16S rRNA gene profiling. Results: Forty IBS patients were enrolled from five Italian centers. Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-1572 did not significantly improve IBS symptoms, including primary efficacy variables worst abdominal pain/discomfort and IBS degree of relief. Interestingly, Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-1572 induced a significant reduction in genus Ruminococcus, dominated by taxa related to Ruminococcus bromii and Ruminococcus callidus, a significant increase in the SCFAs acetate and butyrate, and a significant reduction in the pro-inflammatory cytokine interleukin-15. Conclusions: This pilot study shows that Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-1572 is able to modulate gut microbiota structure/function and reduce immune activation in IBS. As no statistically significant effect on IBS-symptoms was found, further studies are necessary to determine the role of this probiotic in IBS. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov registry under identifier NCT02371499

Randomised controlled trial of mesalazine in IBS.

OBJECTIVE: Low-grade intestinal inflammation plays a role in the pathophysiology of IBS. In this trial, we aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of mesalazine in patients with IBS. DESIGN: We conducted a phase 3, multicentre, tertiary setting, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with Rome III confirmed IBS. Patients were randomly assigned to either mesalazine, 800 mg, or placebo, three times daily for 12 weeks, and were followed for additional 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was satisfactory relief of abdominal pain/discomfort for at least half of the weeks of the treatment period. The key secondary endpoint was satisfactory relief of overall IBS symptoms. Supportive analyses were also performed classifying as responders patients with a percentage of affirmative answers of at least 75% or >75% of time. RESULTS: A total of 185 patients with IBS were enrolled from 21 centres. For the primary endpoint, the responder patients were 68.6% in the mesalazine group versus 67.4% in the placebo group (p=0.870; 95% CI -12.8 to 15.1). In explorative analyses, with the 75% rule or >75% rule, the percentage of responders was greater in the mesalazine group with a difference over placebo of 11.6% (p=0.115; 95% CI -2.7% to 26.0%) and 5.9% (p=0.404; 95% CI -7.8% to 19.4%), respectively, although these differences were not significant. For the key secondary endpoint, overall symptoms improved in the mesalazine group and reached a significant difference of 15.1% versus placebo (p=0.032; 95% CI 1.5% to 28.7%) with the >75% rule. CONCLUSIONS: Mesalazine treatment was not superior than placebo on the study primary endpoint. However, a subgroup of patients with IBS showed a sustained therapy response and benefits from a mesalazine therapy

Randomised controlled trial of mesalazine in IBS

Low-grade intestinal inflammation plays a role in the pathophysiology of IBS. In this trial, we aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of mesalazine in patients with IBS

Adherence to European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Performance Measures for Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Nationwide Survey From the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy

Background: The quality of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy has been recently identified as a major priority being associated with many outcomes and patient's experience. Objective: To assess adherence of endoscopists to the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) quality performance measures for upper and lower GI endoscopy in Italy. Methods: All endoscopist members of the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SIED) were invited from October 2018 to December 2018 to participate to a self-administered questionnaire-based survey. The questionnaire included questions on demographics and professional characteristics, and the recent ESGE quality performance measures for upper and lower GI endoscopy. Results: A total of 392 endoscopists participated in the study. Only a minority (18.2%) of participants recorded the duration of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and 51% provided accurate photo documentation in the minimum standard of 90% of cases. Almost all endoscopists correctly used Prague and Los Angeles classifications (87.8% and 98.2%, respectively), as well as Seattle and Management of precancerous conditions and lesions in the stomach (MAPS) biopsy protocols (86.5% and 91.4%, respectively). However, only 52.8% of participants monitored complications after therapeutic EGD, and 40.8% recorded patients with a diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE). With regard to colonoscopy, almost all endoscopists (93.9%) used the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale for measuring bowel preparation quality and reported a cecal intubation rate ≥90%. However, about a quarter (26.2%) of participants reported an adenoma detection rate of &lt;25%, only 52.8% applied an appropriate polypectomy technique, 48% monitored complications after the procedure, and 12.4% measured patient's experience. Conclusion: The adherence of endoscopists to ESGE performance measures for GI endoscopy is sub-optimal in Italy. There is a need to disseminate and implement performance measures and endorse educational and scientific interventions on the quality of endoscopy