Endoscopic pyloromyotomy for the treatment of severe and refractory gastroparesis: a pilot, randomised, sham-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE Endoscopic pyloromyotomy (G-POEM) is a minimally invasive treatment option with promising uncontrolled outcome results in patients with gastroparesis. DESIGN In this prospective randomised trial, we compared G-POEM with a sham procedure in patients with severe gastroparesis. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with treatment success (defined as a decrease in the Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) by at least 50%) at 6 months. Patients randomised to the sham group with persistent symptoms were offered cross-over G-POEM. RESULTS The enrolment was stopped after the interim analysis by the Data and Safety Monitoring Board prior to reaching the planned sample of 86 patients. A total of 41 patients (17 diabetic, 13 postsurgical, 11 idiopathic; 46% male) were randomised (21 G-POEM, 20-sham). Treatment success rate was 71% (95% CI 50 to 86) after G-POEM versus 22% (8-47) after sham (p=0.005). Treatment success in patients with diabetic, postsurgical and idiopathic gastroparesis was 89% (95% CI 56 to 98), 50% (18-82) and 67% (30-90) after G-POEM; the corresponding rates in the sham group were 17% (3-57), 29% (7-67) and 20% (3-67).Median gastric retention at 4 hours decreased from 22% (95% CI 17 to 31) to 12% (5-22) after G-POEM and did not change after sham: 26% (18-39) versus 24% (11-35). Twelve patients crossed over to G-POEM with 9 of them (75%) achieving treatment success. CONCLUSION In severe gastroparesis, G-POEM is superior to a sham procedure for improving both symptoms and gastric emptying 6 months after the procedure. These results are not entirely conclusive in patients with idiopathic and postsurgical aetiologies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT03356067; ClinicalTrials.gov

Comparison of Inflammatory Response to Transgastric and Transcolonic NOTES

Aims. The aim of our study was to determine the physiologic impact of NOTES and to compare the transgastric and transcolonic approaches. Methods. Thirty pigs were randomized to transgastric, transcolonic, or laparoscopic peritoneoscopy. Blood was drawn and analyzed for C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin- (IL-) 1β, IL-6, WBCs, and platelets. Results. Endoscopic closure with an OTSC was successful in all 20 animals. The postoperative course was uneventful in all animals. CRP values rose on day 1 in all animals and slowly declined to baseline levels on day 14 with no differences between the groups (P>0.05, NS). The levels of TNF-α were significantly increased in the transcolonic group (P<0.01); however this difference was already present prior to the procedure and remained unchanged. No differences were observed in IL1-β and IL-6 values. There was a temporary rise of WBC on day 1 and of platelets on day 7 in all groups (P>0.05, NS). Conclusions. Transgastric, transcolonic, and laparoscopic peritoneoscopy resulted in similar changes in systemic inflammatory markers. Our findings do not support the assumption that NOTES is less invasive than laparoscopy

Perfect or Failed ERCP: What Makes the Difference?

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become an effective and safe therapeutic method, providing clinical success in more than 80% of cases. As ERCP has evolved from a diagnostic to a therapeutic procedure, technical demands have risen. Furthermore, it is an invasive procedure that can be potentially harmful when administered improperly. Quality of ERCP and procedural outcome are dependent on various factors that are related to the patient, procedure, and endoscopist. These factors are reviewed in detail and their contribution to ERCP quality is presented and discussed. Preventive therapies through procedural techniques and medical management to avoid complications are available. Proper and organised training and ERCP outcome reporting are essential for further quality improvement