Design of the Weight-loss Endoscopy Trial (WET): a multi-center, randomized, controlled trial comparing weight loss in endoscopically implanted duodenal-jejunal bypass liners vs. intragastric balloons vs. a sham procedure

Abstract Background Obesity is a global problem leading to reduced life expectancy, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and many types of cancer. Even people willing to accept treatment only achieve a mean weight loss of about 5 kg using commercial weight loss programs. Surgical interventions, e.g. sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass are effective but accompanied by risk of serious complications and side effects. Less invasive endoscopic procedures mainly comprise the intragastric balloon (IB) and the duodenal-jejunal bypass liner (DJBL). To date, a randomized comparison between these devices has not been undertaken or shown to be superior to a sham procedure. Methods We designed a multi-center, randomized, patient and assessor-blinded, controlled trial comparing weight loss in endoscopically implanted IB vs. DJBL vs. a sham procedure. A total of 150 patients with a BMI > 35 kg/m2 or > 30 with obesity-related comorbidities and indication for proton pump inhibitors are randomized to receive either IB, DJBL or a sham gastroscopy (2:2:1 ratio). All participants undergo regular dietary consultation. The IB will be removed after 6 months, whereas the DJBL will be explanted after 12 months. All patients will receive gastroscopies at implantation and explantation of the devices or sedation without gastroscopy to maintain blinding. Main exclusion criteria are malignant diseases, peptic ulcer or previous bariatric intervention. Weight loss 12 months after explantation of the devices, changes in comorbidities, quality of life, complication rates and safety will be evaluated. Discussion This trial could help to identify the most effective and safest endoscopic device, thus determining the new standard procedure for endoscopic bariatric treatment. Trial registration 16th January 2017. DRKS00011036. Funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG)

Design of the Weight-loss Endoscopy Trial (WET) : a multi-center, randomized, controlled trial comparing weight loss in endoscopically implanted duodenal-jejunal bypass liners vs. intragastric balloons vs. a sham procedure

Background: Obesity is a global problem leading to reduced life expectancy, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and many types of cancer. Even people willing to accept treatment only achieve a mean weight loss of about 5 kg using commercial weight loss programs. Surgical interventions, e.g. sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass are effective but accompanied by risk of serious complications and side effects. Less invasive endoscopic procedures mainly comprise the intragastric balloon (IB) and the duodenal-jejunal bypass liner (DJBL). To date, a randomized comparison between these devices has not been undertaken or shown to be superior to a sham procedure. Methods: We designed a multi-center, randomized, patient and assessor-blinded, controlled trial comparing weight loss in endoscopically implanted IB vs. DJBL vs. a sham procedure. A total of 150 patients with a BMI > 35 kg/m2 or > 30 with obesity-related comorbidities and indication for proton pump inhibitors are randomized to receive either IB, DJBL or a sham gastroscopy (2:2:1 ratio). All participants undergo regular dietary consultation. The IB will be removed after 6 months, whereas the DJBL will be explanted after 12 months. All patients will receive gastroscopies at implantation and explantation of the devices or sedation without gastroscopy to maintain blinding. Main exclusion criteria are malignant diseases, peptic ulcer or previous bariatric intervention. Weight loss 12 months after explantation of the devices, changes in comorbidities, quality of life, complication rates and safety will be evaluated. Discussion: This trial could help to identify the most effective and safest endoscopic device, thus determining the new standard procedure for endoscopic bariatric treatment. Trial registration: 16th January 2017. DRKS00011036. Funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG)

Improving preparedness to respond to cross-border hepatitis A outbreaks in the European Union/European Economic Area: towards comparable sequencing of hepatitis A virus

IntroductionSequence-based typing of hepatitis A virus (HAV) is important for outbreak detection, investigation and surveillance. In 2013, sequencing was central to resolving a large European Union (EU)-wide outbreak related to frozen berries. However, as the sequenced HAV genome regions were only partly comparable between countries, results were not always conclusive.AimThe objective was to gather information on HAV surveillance and sequencing in EU/European Economic Area (EEA) countries to find ways to harmonise their procedures, for improvement of cross-border outbreak responses.MethodsIn 2014, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) conducted a survey on HAV surveillance practices in EU/EEA countries. The survey enquired whether a referral system for confirming primary diagnostics of hepatitis A existed as well as a central collection/storage of hepatitis A cases' samples for typing. Questions on HAV sequencing procedures were also asked. Based on the results, an expert consultation proposed harmonised procedures for cross-border outbreak response, in particular regarding sequencing. In 2016, a follow-up survey assessed uptake of suggested methods.ResultsOf 31 EU/EEA countries, 23 (2014) and 27 (2016) participated. Numbers of countries with central collection and storage of HAV positive samples and of those performing sequencing increased from 12 to 15 and 12 to 14 respectively in 2016, with all countries typing an overlapping fragment of 218 nt. However, variation existed in the sequenced genomic regions and their lengths.ConclusionsWhile HAV sequences in EU/EEA countries are comparable for surveillance, collaboration in sharing and comparing these can be further strengthened.We have received valuable comments to the manuscript from Mike Catchpole, Piotr Kramaz and Marc Struelens and acknowledge their contribution in improving the paper.S