American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society Task Force Recommendations for Resumption of Motility Laboratory Operations During the COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 detection prior to motility examinations: Prospective evaluation of pre-test questionnaires and PCR-testing

BACKGROUND/AIMS

COVID-19 pandemic has produced an increased burden for motility laboratories due to the need to implement measures to minimize infection risk during examinations. International Societies have proposed algorithms for evaluation of active infection risk using symptom questionnaires or performing COVID-19 specific detection tests. The aim of the present study is to evaluate prospectively the independent value of a symptom-based questionnaire and RT-PCR test to detect COVID-19 infection before a digestive motility examination.

PATIENTS/METHODS

All patients referred for a motility study during a 4 month period with high incidence of COVID-19 in the community were prospectively evaluated with a symptom-questionnaire administered by phone one week before the examination, and a PCR test performed 48h before the examination, following international guidelines recommendations.

RESULTS

The symptom questionnaire could be obtained from 435 patients, 7 patients referred COVID-19 symptoms, but only 1 of them had a positive PCR. From 481 PCR tests performed, 8 were positive. Only 1 patient had reported symptoms in the previous questionnaire, and 2 additional patients developed COVID-19 symptoms later. Hence, 435 telephonic questionnaires should be done for one COVID-19 case detection (detection tax 0.22%); and 60 PCR should be performed for one COVID-19 case detection (detection tax 1.66%).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of screening strategies prior to a motility exploration results in a low rate of infection detection, especially the use of subjective symptom questionnaires, and the correct protection measures during motility explorations with aerosol generation remain the cornerstone to prevent COVID-19 infections.

Organizing and Developing a GI Motility Lab in Community Practice: Challenges and Rewards

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Neurogastroenterology and motility is a rapidly evolving subspecialty that encompasses over 33% of gastroenterological disorders, and up to 50% of referrals to gastroenterology practice. It includes common problems such as dysphagia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, irritable bowel syndrome, chronic constipation, gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia, gas/bloating, small intestinal bacterial overgrowth, food intolerance and fecal incontinence Standard diagnostic tests such as endoscopy or imaging are normal in these conditions. To define the underlying mechanism(s)/etiology of these disorders, diagnostic motility tests are often required. These are best performed by well-trained personnel in a dedicated motility laboratory. Our purpose is to provide an up-to-date overview on how to organize and develop a motility laboratory based on our collective experiences in setting up such facilities in academia and community practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

A lack of knowledge, training and facilities for providing diagnostic motility tests has led to suboptimal patient care. A motility laboratory is the hub for diagnostic and therapeutic motility procedures. Common procedures include esophageal function tests such as esophageal manometry and pH monitoring, anorectal function tests suchlike anorectal manometry, neurophysiology and balloon expulsion, dysbiosis and food intolerance tests such as hydrogen/methane breath tests, and gastrointestinal transit assessment. These tests provide an accurate diagnosis and guide clinical management including use of medications, biofeedback therapy, neuromodulation, behavioral therapies, evidence-based dietary interventions and endoscopic or surgical procedures. Further, there have been recent developments in billing and coding of motility procedures and training requirements that are not well known. This review provides a stepwise approach on how to set-up a motility laboratory in the community or academic practice and includes the rationale, infrastructure, staffing needs, commonly performed motility tests and their clinical utility, billing and coding strategies, training needs and economic considerations for setting up this service.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on high-resolution manometry and peroral endoscopic myotomy for esophageal motility disorder in Japan

AIM

To elucidate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the practice of high-resolution manometry (HRM) and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in Japan.

METHODS

We utilized a large-scale database involving 14 high-volume centers in Japan to investigate changes in the numbers of HRM and POEM procedures performed and outcomes of POEM between 2019 and 2020. A questionnaire survey was also conducted to analyze pandemic-associated changes in the HRM and POEM protocols.

RESULTS

Compared to that in 2019, the number of HRM and POEM procedures decreased by 17.2% (1587-1314) and 20.9% (630-498), respectively. These declines were prominent during the state of emergency from April to May 2020, particularly in pandemic areas. HRM and POEM in nonpandemic areas were relatively unaffected. From 2019 to 2020, there was a 0.4% (254-248) decrease in POEM cases within the prefecture, but the number outside the prefecture decreased by 33.6% (372-247). During the pandemic, the safety and efficacy of POEM were maintained. The implementation of personal protective equipment (PPE) measures varied among facilities, and PPE for POEM was relatively insufficient compared to that for HRM.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic influenced HRM and POEM practices in Japan. It is necessary to establish a sufficient system for HRM and POEM in each hospital as well as countrywide to overcome the effects of the pandemic.

Same day barium esophagography and high-resolution manometry during the COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE

Double contrast barium esophagography (BAS) and high-resolution manometry (HRM) are traditionally performed on separate days to allow for pre-procedural fasting. In an effort to minimize COVID-19 exposure and improve appointment efficiency with required pre-procedure testing, we permitted same day HRM prior to BAS. Our study aimed to evaluate the adequacy of barium mucosal coating with same day HRM prior to BAS compared to BAS alone.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective pilot cohort study including 14 patients undergoing same day HRM prior to BAS and 20 patients undergoing BAS alone over an 8-month interval during the COVID-19 pandemic. Three abdominal imaging subspecialty-trained radiologists blindly reviewed the images and graded adequacy of esophageal coating on a 4-point scale with a score of 1 representing inadequate coating and 4 representing optimal coating.

RESULTS

For the cohort studied thus far, the mean grade of the HRM and BAS group was 3.17 with a standard deviation of 0.66. The mean grade of the BAS alone group was 3.13 with a standard deviation of 0.79. There was no statistical difference in the adequacy of esophageal coating between the two groups (p-value 0.97).

CONCLUSION

Same day HRM prior to BAS has no detrimental effect on barium mucosal coating compared to BAS alone. Though created to limit patient exposures during the COVID pandemic, same day BAS and HRM may prevent delays in care and improve convenience towards improved patient-centered care beyond the pandemic.

Evaluating the impact of an enhanced triage process on the performance and diagnostic yield of oesophageal physiology studies post COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted on the provision of oesophageal physiology investigations. During the recovery phase, triaging tools were empirically recommended by national bodies for prioritisation of referrals amidst rising waiting lists and reduced capacity. We evaluated the performance of an enhanced triage process (ETP) consisting of telephone triage combined with the hierarchical 'traffic light system' recommended in the UK for prioritising oesophageal physiology referrals.

DESIGN

In a cross-sectional study of patients referred for oesophageal physiology studies at a tertiary centre, data were compared between patients who underwent oesophageal physiology studies 6 months prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and those who were investigated within 6 months after service resumption with implementation of the ETP.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Adjusted time from referral to investigation; non-attendance rates; the detection of Chicago Classification (CC) oesophageal motility disorders on oesophageal manometry and severity of acid reflux on 24 hours pH/impedance monitoring.

RESULTS

Following service resumption, the ETP reduced non-attendance rates from 9.1% to 2.8% (p=0.021). Use of the 'traffic light system' identified a higher proportion of patients with CC oesophageal motility disorders in the 'amber' and 'red' triage categories, compared with the 'green' category (p=0.011). ETP also reduced the time to test for those who were subsequently found to have a major CC oesophageal motility diagnosis compared with those with minor CC disorders and normal motility (p=0.004). The ETP did not affect the yield or timing of acid reflux studies.

CONCLUSION

ETPs can effectively prioritise patients with oesophageal motility disorders and may therefore have a role beyond the current pandemic.

The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Neurogastroenterologists in Latin America: Results of an Online Survey

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected medical practice in fields not related to the infection. Neurogastroenterology is a subspecialty of gastroenterology focused on motility and functional gastrointestinal disorders, including consultations, and conducting procedures (eg, endoscopies, manometries/pH-monitoring).

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the impact of COVID-19 on Neurogastroenterology in Latin America.

METHODS

Members of the Latin American Society of Neurogastroenterology were invited by e-mail and social networks to participate in an online anonymous survey. It included 24 questions on demographics, clinical practice and procedure characteristics, impact of the pandemic, Telemedicine, and involvement in COVID-19 patient care.

RESULTS

Sixty-one members mainly from Colombia, Mexico, and Brazil answered the survey. All reported a negative impact on their practice (88.6%: a 61% to 100% decrease), mainly in office consultations and elective endoscopies. Interestingly, emergency endoscopies decreased by 33.3%, while only 4% stopped performing manometries/pH-monitoring. The main reasons were patients' fear for consulting, country's lockdown, and physician's decision to prevent infection spread. Telemedicine was implemented by 83% but only 64.7% were being remunerated. Almost 46% had to reduce salaries and working hours of their personnel. Fifty-nine percent had colleagues diagnosed with COVID-19, 24.6% were involved in these patients' care, and 11.5% were mobilized to COVID-19 wards. There were country differences: Colombia, lockdown (P=0.001); Mexico, COVID-19 patient-care (P=0.053); Mexico/Colombia, working in COVID-19 wards, (P=0.012); Brazil, less common elective procedures' ban (P=0.012) and Telemedicine/reimbursement (P=0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the practice and wellness of Neurogastroenterologists in Latin America. Guidelines to resume activities and policies for Telemedicine practice and reimbursement are warranted.

Risk of COVID-19 transmission in esophageal, anorectal manometry and 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring

BACKGROUND

the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the interruption of most manometry or impedance-pH monitoring studies. The risk of restarting activities is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

assess the risk of SARS-CoV-2 virus infection, both to patients and healthcare workers, in relation to esophageal and anorectal functional tests during the pandemic without protective measures.

METHOD

a questionnaire was designed to determine whether patients and healthcare workers had COVID-19, confirmed by either a test or compatible symptoms, after functional studies were performed from January until March 2020.

RESULTS

the survey was answered by 263 (92.9 %) patients. Four (1.52 %) patients had confirmed COVID-19 in the two weeks after the functional test (adjusted rate 8.34 cases per 1,000 [95 % CI -0.06-16.74], OR 0.84 [95 % CI: 0.83-0.85], p < 0.001) and no patient after anorectal manometry. Another five had only compatible symptoms, for a total of nine patients (3.42 %) (adjusted rate 27.50 cases/1,000 [95 % CI: 7.27-47.74], OR 2.84 [95 % CI: 2.81-2.87]). In the total study period, 18.25 % had confirmed COVID-19 or compatible symptoms. The average number of days between the procedure and the first day of symptoms was progressively shortened (January: 56 days, February: 33 days, March: 10.5 days). Two of ten healthcare workers (20 %) had confirmed COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

the risk of COVID-19 infection when performing functional tests is low and more related to the evolution of the pandemic rather than to the procedure itself. The small number of healthcare workers included in the study does not allow a definitive conclusion to be drawn on their risk of infection.

European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility recommendations for conducting gastrointestinal motility and function testing in the recovery phase of the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

During the peak of the COronaVIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, care for patients with gastrointestinal motility and functional disorders was largely suspended. In the recovery phases of the pandemic, non-urgent medical care is resumed, but there is a lack of guidance for restarting and safely conducting motility and function testing. Breath tests and insertion of manometry and pH-monitoring probes carry a risk of SARS-CoV-2 spread through droplet formation.

METHODS

A panel of experts from the European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) evaluated emerging national and single-center recommendations to provide the best current evidence and a pragmatic approach to ensure the safe conduct of motility and function testing for both healthcare professionals and patients.

RESULTS

At a general level, this involves evaluation of the urgency of the procedure, evaluation of the infectious risk associated with the patient, the investigation and the healthcare professional(s) involved, provision of the test planning and test units, education and training of staff, and use of personnel protection equipment. Additional guidance is provided for specific procedures such as esophageal manometry, pH monitoring, and breath tests.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

The ESNM guidelines provide pragmatic and appropriate guidance for the safe conduct of motility and function testing in the COVID-19 pandemic and early recovery phase.

Recommendations for the reopening and activity resumption of the neurogastroenterology units in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. Position of the Sociedad Latinoamericana de Neurogastroenterología

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced the establishment of preventive measures against contagion during the performance of diagnostic and therapeutic tests in gastroenterology. Digestive tract motility tests involve an intermediate and elevated risk for the transmission of COVID-19 infection. Given their elective or non-urgent indication in the majority of cases, we recommend postponing those tests until significant control of the infection rate in each Latin American country has been achieved during the pandemic. When the health authorities allow the return to normality, and in the absence of an effective treatment for or preventive vaccine against COVID-19 infection, we recommend a strict protocol for classifying patients according to their infectious-contagious status through the appropriate use of tests for the detection of the virus and the immune response to it, and the following of protective measures by the healthcare personnel to prevent contagion during the performance of a gastrointestinal motility test.