Effects of preoperative proton pump inhibitor administration on bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastric Cancer and Pre-Malignant Gastric Lesions

Early gastric cancer comprises gastric malignancies that are confined to the mucosa or submucosa, irrespective of lymph node metastasis. Endoscopic resection is currently pivotal for the management of such early lesions, and it is the recommended treatment for tumors presenting a very low risk of lymph node metastasis. In general, these lesions consist of two groups of differentiated mucosal adenocarcinomas: non-ulcerated lesions (regardless of their size) and small ulcerated lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection is the technique of choice in most cases. This procedure has high rates of complete histological resection while maintaining gastric anatomy and its functions, resulting in fewer adverse events than surgery and having a lesser impact on patient-reported quality of life. Nonetheless, approximately 20% of resected lesions do not fulfill curative criteria and demand further treatment, highlighting the importance of patient selection. Additionally, the preservation of the stomach results in a moderate risk of metachronous lesions, which underlines the need for surveillance. We review the current evidence regarding the endoscopic treatment of early gastric cancer, including the short-and long-term results and management after resection.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection techniques and technology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Review

ESGE suggests conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD; marking and mucosal incision followed by circumferential incision and stepwise submucosal dissection) for most esophageal and gastric lesions. ESGE suggests tunneling ESD for esophageal lesions involving more than two-thirds of the esophageal circumference. ESGE recommends the pocket-creation method for colorectal ESD, at least if traction devices are not used. The use of dedicated ESD knives with size adequate to the location/thickness of the gastrointestinal wall is recommended. It is suggested that isotonic saline or viscous solutions can be used for submucosal injection. ESGE recommends traction methods in esophageal and colorectal ESD and in selected gastric lesions. After gastric ESD, coagulation of visible vessels is recommended, and post-procedural high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (or vonoprazan). ESGE recommends against routine closure of the ESD defect, except in duodenal ESD. ESGE recommends corticosteroids after resection of  > 50 % of the esophageal circumference. The use of carbon dioxide when performing ESD is recommended. ESGE recommends against the performance of second-look endoscopy after ESD. ESGE recommends endoscopy/colonoscopy in the case of significant bleeding (hemodynamic instability, drop in hemoglobin > 2 g/dL, severe ongoing bleeding) to perform endoscopic hemostasis with thermal methods or clipping; hemostatic powders represent rescue therapies. ESGE recommends closure of immediate perforations with clips (through-the-scope or cap-mounted, depending on the size and shape of the perforation), as soon as possible but ideally after securing a good plane for further dissection.

Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of gastric dysplasia and early cancer: Current evidence and what the future may hold

Gastric cancer accounts for a significant proportion of worldwide cancer-related morbidity and mortality. The well documented precancerous cascade provides an opportunity for clinicians to detect and treat gastric cancers at an endoscopically curable stage. In high prevalence regions such as Japan and Korea, this has led to the implementation of population screening programs. However, guidelines remain ambiguous in lower prevalence regions. In recent years, there have been many advances in the endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions. More advanced endoscopic imaging has led to improved detection and characterization of gastric lesions as well as superior accuracy for delineation of margins prior to resection. In addition, promising early data on artificial intelligence in gastroscopy suggests a future role for this technology in maximizing the yield of advanced endoscopic imaging. Data on endoscopic resection (ER) are particularly robust in Japan and Korea, with high rates of curative ER and markedly reduced procedural morbidity. However, there is a shortage of data in other regions to support the applicability of protocols from these high prevalence countries. Future advances in endoscopic therapeutics will likely lead to further expansion of the current indications for ER, as both technology and proceduralist expertise continue to grow.

[Clinical Practice Guideline for Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastrointestinal Cancer]

Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.

Clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer

Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.

Additional Mosapride to Proton Pump Inhibitor for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), the additive effect of mosapride to a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is still controversial. This meta-analysis integrated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which mosapride combined with a PPI was compared with a PPI alone in GERD treatment.

METHODS

RCTs were systematically searched with the PubMed, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and the Igaku-Chuo-Zasshi database. We combined the data from the RCTs with a random effects model, calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) and pooled the risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

We included nine RCTs in the present meta-analysis. In the mosapride combined with PPI group, the improvement of the symptom score was significantly greater than that in the PPI alone group without significant heterogeneity (SMD: -0.28, 95% CI: -0.45 to -0.12, p = 0.0007). In the mosapride combined with PPI group, the symptom score after treatment was significantly lower than that in the PPI alone group (SMD: -0.24, 95% CI: -0.42 to -0.06, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Mosapride combined with a PPI significantly improved the reflux symptom score compared with that of PPI alone.

Clinical Practice Guideline for Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastrointestinal Cancer

Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.

Clinical Practice Guideline for Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastrointestinal Cancer

Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by <i>en bloc</i> fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.

Bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric lesions

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is generally used to treat gastric mucosal and submucosal lesions. Nevertheless, ESD is more difficult and complicated to perform than a traditional endoscopic mucosal resection, which can increase the incidence of various complications including hemorrhage, perforation and infection. Hemorrhage is a major post-ESD complication. Prevention and early diagnosis of post-ESD bleeding for gastric lesions are closely associated with the efficacy and safety of the operation. Many studies have reported the risks of and the preventative measures for hemorrhage after gastric ESD, but there remain some issues to be solved. We thus reviewed the risk factors, precautions and treatments for hemorrhage after ESD of gastric lesions.

Effects of Encircled Abdominal Compression Device in Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis

: Background and Aim: The efficacy of encircling abdominal compression devices in colonoscopies is inconsistent. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which encircling abdominal compression devices were compared with control in colonoscopies.

METHODS

We systematically searched RCTs published in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and the Igaku-Chuo-Zasshi database. The data from the eligible RCTs were combined using the random-effects model. The weighted mean differences (WMDs), pooled odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to the control group, encircling abdominal compression devices significantly reduced the caecal intubation time (WMD: -1.31, 95% CI: -2.40 to -0.23, p = 0.02). Compared to the control group, encircling abdominal compression devices significantly decreased the frequency of postural change (OR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.41, p < 0.00001). Compared to the control group, the use of encircling abdominal compression devices significantly reduced the need for abdominal compression (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.70, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Encircling abdominal compression devices in colonoscopies was found to reduce the caecal intubation time and the frequency of abdominal compression.

Continuous Infusion versus Intermittent Dosing with Pantoprazole for Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Background/Aims

Proton pump inhibitors are widely used to prevent gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)-related bleeding, but no standard administration regimens have been established. We aimed to prospectively compare the effects of continuous infusion and intermittent dosing with pantoprazole on preventing gastric ESD-related bleeding. Additionally, we analyzed the risk factors for bleeding.

Methods

From April 2012 to May 2013, patients with a gastric epithelial neoplasm scheduled for ESD in the Pusan National University Hospital were randomly assigned to one of two groups according to the pantoprazole administration regimen (continuous infusion or intermittent dosing). The primary outcomes measured were intra- and postprocedural bleeding events.

Results

The final analysis included 401 patients. The rate of significant intraprocedural bleeding was 25.4% in the C group and 24.0% in the I group, with no significant difference (p=0.419). In addition, there was no significant difference in the postprocedural bleeding rate between the C and I groups (11.7% vs 10.2%, p=0.374). Multivariate analysis showed that intraprocedural bleeding was associated with the proximal tumor location, the presence of fibrosis, and the size of the resected specimen, whereas postprocedural bleeding was associated with the size of the resected specimen and the procedure/coagulation time.

Conclusions

Intermittent dosing with pantoprazole is sufficient and cost-effective for the prevention of gastric ESD-related bleeding. Operators should consider tumor characteristics when planning ESD to minimize the risk of intraprocedural bleeding, and patients with large iatrogenic ulcers should be carefully monitored for postprocedural bleeding.

Role of mucoprotective agents in endoscopic submucosal dissection-derived ulcers: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Currently, it is still unclear whether adding a mucoprotective agent to a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) results in better outcomes compared with using a PPI alone in patients with post-gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) ulcers. This study aimed to examine the efficacy of PPI alone versus combination treatment in healing of post-gastric ESD ulcers, as well as on delayed bleeding and amount of blood transfused.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ISI Web of knowledge databases, up until May 2017, for randomized trials comparing PPI alone versus PPI plus a mucoprotective drug in achieving ulcer healing in patients undergoing gastric ESD was performed. The primary outcome is scarring stage on endoscopic assessment at 4 or 8 weeks after gastric ESD.

RESULTS

From an initial 3071 citations, eight articles (n = 953 lesions from 934 patients) were analyzed. Patients receiving combination treatment achieved a scarring stage significantly more often than those on a PPIs alone at 4 or 8 weeks after ESD, (risk ratio = 1.36, 95% CI; 1.06-1.75). No study reported amount of blood transfused. There were no significant between treatment-group differences in terms of delayed bleeding (risk ratio = 0.58, 95% CI; 0.17-1.99). Neither location of ulcer nor Helicobacter pylori infection was related to ulcer scarring stage.

CONCLUSION

The limited evidences suggested combination treatment may be more effective in accelerating the process of ulcer healing in patients undergoing gastric ESD than the use of PPI alone, but does not appear to alter delayed bleeding risk.

Dexmedetomidine vs propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy: A meta-analysis

Background and aim

Several randomized controlled trials have compared sedation with dexmedetomidine and propofol in gastrointestinal endoscopy, with contradictory results. We conducted a meta-analysis of data from randomized controlled trials that compared dexmedetomidine with propofol.

Methods

We searched PubMed, the Cochrane library, and the Igaku-chuo-zasshi database for randomized trials eligible for inclusion in our meta-analysis. We identified six eligible randomized trials from the database search, and compared the effect of propofol versus dexmedetomidine with respect to: (a) patient's satisfaction level, (b) body movement or gagging, (c) cardiopulmonary complications, and (d) change in heart rate. Data from eligible studies were combined to calculate pooled risk difference (RD) or weighted mean difference (WMD).

Results

Compared to propofol, dexmedetomidine significantly decreased the patient's satisfaction level (WMD: -0.678, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.149 to -0.207, p = 0.0048), and there was no significant heterogeneity among the trial results. The pooled RD for developing body movement or gagging when using dexmedetomidine was 0.107 (95% CI: -0.09 to 0.305, p = 0.288), with no significant differences. Compared with propofol, the pooled RD for hypotension, hypoxia, and bradycardia with dexmedetomidine sedation were -0.029 (95% CI: -0.11 to 0.05), -0.080 (95% CI: -0.178 to 0.018), and 0.022 (95% CI: -0.027 to 0.07), respectively, with no significant differences. Compared to propofol, dexmedetomidine significantly decreased the heart rate (WMD: -10.41, 95% CI: -13.77 to -7.051, p ≤ 0.0001), without significant heterogeneity.

Conclusions

In gastrointestinal endoscopy, patient satisfaction level was higher in propofol administration, when compared to dexmedetomidine. The risk of complications was similar.

Effect of prophylactic clipping in colorectal endoscopic resection: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The efficacy of clipping for preventing delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic resection is still controversial. To assess the efficacy of prophylactic clipping, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, the Cochrane library, and the Igaku-chuo-zasshi database for randomized trials eligible for inclusion in our meta-analysis. We identified seven eligible randomized trials from the database search, and compared the effect of clipping versus non-clipping with respect to delayed bleeding and perforation. Data from eligible studies were combined to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Postoperative bleeding was observed in 41 of 1526 cases (2.7%) without clipping and in 32 of 1533 cases (2.1%) with clipping (OR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.39-1.47, p = 0.414). There was no significant heterogeneity among the trial results (I-Square = 26.7%, p = 0.22). In the subgroup analysis based on small tumor size (<20 mm) and large tumor size (≥20 mm), there were no significant differences. Compared with non-clipping, the pooled OR of developing perforation with clipping was 1.00 (95% CI: 0.14-7.25), indicating no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clipping did not decrease the occurrence of delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic resection. Clipping could be of interest in patients with a high risk of bleeding (anticoagulation) or large lesions, but with the available trials data to prove this are scarce.

Comparative study of saliva peptide signatures between gastric carcinoma and chronic gastritis

AIM: To screen differential protein expression profiles in saliva between gastric carcinoma and chronic gastritis, and to establish a model for differentiating these groups.

METHODS: Saliva samples from 57 patients with gastric carcinoma and 28 patients with gastritis were purified with weak cationic-exchange magnetic beads (MB-WCX) and then analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS). Subsequently, we compared the saliva peptide signatures of the two groups and obtained differently expressed peptides by using Biomarker Wizard. Then, we established two diagnostic models to distinguish the gastric carcinoma group from the gastritis group and normal control group by using Biomarker Patterns 5.0.2.

RESULTS: A diagnostic pattern for discriminating between the gastric carcinoma group and gastritis group using three peptides (m/z 4267.09, 6564.85, 2138.14) was established with a 96% (55/57) sensitivity and an 86% (24/28) specificity. A sensitivity of 89%(51/57) and a specificity of 75% (21/28) were obtained in cross validation.

CONCLUSION: The novel molecular diagnostic model obtained by saliva protein fingerprinting for distinguishing gastric carcinoma from chronic gastritis is sensitive and noninvasive.

Timing of oral refeeding in acute pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The optimal timing of oral refeeding in acute pancreatitis is unclear. This study aimed to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared early oral refeeding with standard oral refeeding in acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane library, and the Igaku-Chuo-Zasshi database were searched in order to identify RCTs eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. The weighted mean differences (WMDs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Five eligible RCTs were included. Compared with standard oral refeeding, early oral refeeding significantly decreased the length of hospital stay (WMD: -2.22, 95%CI: -3.37 to -1.08, p = 0.0001). Although there was heterogeneity (I²= 56%, p = 0.06), subgroup analysis of the refeeding criteria (immediate group and hungry group) eliminated the heterogeneity. There was no significant difference between the early refeeding group and standard refeeding groups with respect abdominal pain and distension (OR 1.14; 95%CI 0.65-1.99 and OR 1.53; 95%CI 0.81-2.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with standard oral refeeding, early oral refeeding safely reduced the length of hospital stay in patients with acute pancreatitis.