Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Krishnavel V. Chathadi is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Krishnavel V. Chathadi.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2012

The role of endoscopy in Barrett's esophagus and other premalignant conditions of the esophagus

John A. Evans; Dayna S. Early; Norio Fukami; Tamir Ben-Menachem; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; G. Anton Decker; Robert D. Fanelli; Deborah A. Fisher; Kimberly Foley; Joo Ha Hwang; Rajeev Jain; Terry L. Jue; Khalid M. Khan; Jenifer R. Lightdale; Phyllis M. Malpas; John T. Maple; Shabana F. Pasha; John R. Saltzman; Ravi Sharaf; Amandeep K. Shergill; Jason A. Dominitz; Brooks D. Cash

i ( n d m e This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When limited or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results of large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time the guidelines are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommendations were based on reviewed studies and were graded on the strength of the supporting evidence (Table 1).1 The strength of individual recommendations is based on both the aggregate evidence quality and an assessment of the anticipated benefits and harms. Weaker recommendations are indicated by phrases such as “we suggest,” whereas stronger recommendations are typically stated as “we recommend.” This guideline is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. This guideline is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient’s condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these guidelines.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2012

The role of endoscopy in the management of acute non-variceal upper GI bleeding

Joo Ha Hwang; Deborah A. Fisher; Tamir Ben-Menachem; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; G. Anton Decker; Dayna S. Early; John A. Evans; Robert D. Fanelli; Kimberly Foley; Norio Fukami; Rajeev Jain; Terry L. Jue; Kahlid M. Khan; Jenifer R. Lightdale; Phyllis M. Malpas; John T. Maple; Shabana F. Pasha; John R. Saltzman; Ravi Sharaf; Amandeep K. Shergill; Jason A. Dominitz; Brooks D. Cash

d c p B s i R This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When few or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time that the guidelines are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommendations are based on reviewed studies and are graded on the strength of the supporting evidence1 (Table 1). he strength of individual recommendations is based on oth the aggregate evidence quality and an assessment of the nticipated benefits and harms. Weaker recommendations re indicated by phrases such as “We suggest . . . ,” whereas tronger recommendations are typically stated as “We recmmend . . . .” This guideline is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. This guideline is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient’s condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these guidelines.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2016

The management of antithrombotic agents for patients undergoing GI endoscopy.

Ruben D. Acosta; Neena S. Abraham; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; Dayna S. Early; Mohamad A. Eloubeidi; John A. Evans; Ashley L. Faulx; Deborah A. Fisher; Lisa Fonkalsrud; Joo Ha Hwang; Mouen A. Khashab; Jenifer R. Lightdale; V. Raman Muthusamy; Shabana F. Pasha; John R. Saltzman; Aasma Shaukat; Amandeep K. Shergill; Amy Wang; Brooks D. Cash; John M. DeWitt

Ruben D. Acosta, MD, Neena S. Abraham, MD, MSCE, FASGE (invited content expert, ad-hoc member), Vinay Chandrasekhara, MD, Krishnavel V. Chathadi, MD, Dayna S. Early, MD, FASGE, Mohamad A. Eloubeidi, MD, MHS, FASGE, John A. Evans, MD, Ashley L. Faulx, MD, FASGE, Deborah A. Fisher, MD, MHS, FASGE, Lisa Fonkalsrud, BSN, RN, CGRN, Joo Ha Hwang, MD, PhD, FASGE, Mouen A. Khashab, MD, Jenifer R. Lightdale, MD, MPH, FASGE, V. Raman Muthusamy, MD, FASGE, Shabana F. Pasha, MD, John R. Saltzman, MD, FASGE, Aasma Shaukat, MD, MPH, FASGE, Amandeep K. Shergill, MD, Amy Wang, MD, Brooks D. Cash, MD, FASGE, previous Committee Chair, John M. DeWitt, MD, FASGE, Chair


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2015

Bowel preparation before colonoscopy

John R. Saltzman; Brooks D. Cash; Shabana F. Pasha; Dayna S. Early; V. Raman Muthusamy; Mouen A. Khashab; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; Robert D. Fanelli; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Jenifer R. Lightdale; Lisa Fonkalsrud; Amandeep K. Shergill; Joo Ha Hwang; G. Anton Decker; Terry L. Jue; Ravi Sharaf; Deborah A. Fisher; John A. Evans; Kimberly Foley; Aasma Shaukat; Mohamad A. Eloubeidi; Ashley L. Faulx; Amy Wang; Ruben D. Acosta

This is one of a series of documents discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this document that updates a previously issued consensus statement and a technology status evaluation report on this topic. In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed between January 1975 and March 2014 by using the search terms “colonoscopy,” “bowel preparation,” “intestines,” and “preparation.” Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When limited or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Recommendations for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time that the documents are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of recommendations contained in this document. This document may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommendations were based on reviewed studies and were graded on the strength of the supporting evidence (Table 1). The strength of individual recommendations is based both on the aggregate evidence quality and an assessment of the anticipated benefits and harms. Weaker recommendations are indicated by phrases such as “we suggest,” whereas stronger recommendations are typically stated as “we recommend.” This guideline is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. It is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient’s condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these recommendations and suggestions.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2013

Adverse events associated with EUS and EUS with FNA

Dayna S. Early; Ruben D. Acosta; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; G. Anton Decker; John A. Evans; Robert D. Fanelli; Deborah A. Fisher; Lisa Fonkalsrud; Joo Ha Hwang; Terry L. Jue; Mouen A. Khashab; Jenifer R. Lightdale; V. Raman Muthusamy; Shabana F. Pasha; John R. Saltzman; Ravi Sharaf; Amandep K. Shergill; Brooks D. Cash

c w g g v u 0 w This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. In preparing this document, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When few or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results of large series and reports from recognized experts. This document is based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time that the document was drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this document. This document may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. This document is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. This document is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient’s condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from this document.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2014

The role of endoscopy in the management of variceal hemorrhage

Joo Ha Hwang; Amandeep K. Shergill; Ruben D. Acosta; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; G. Anton Decker; Dayna S. Early; John A. Evans; Robert D. Fanelli; Deborah A. Fisher; Kimberly Foley; Lisa Fonkalsrud; Terry L. Jue; Mouen A. Khashab; Jenifer R. Lightdale; V. Raman Muthusamy; Shabana F. Pasha; John R. Saltzman; Ravi Sharaf; Brooks D. Cash

This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. In preparing this document, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When limited or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Recommendations for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time the guidelines are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this document. This document may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommendations were based on reviewed studies and were graded on the strength of the supporting evidence (Table 1). This document is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. It is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient’s condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these recommendations.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2014

The role of endoscopy in the patient with lower GI bleeding.

Shabana F. Pasha; Amandeep K. Shergill; Ruben D. Acosta; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; Dayna S. Early; John A. Evans; Deborah A. Fisher; Lisa Fonkalsrud; Joo Ha Hwang; Mouen A. Khashab; Jenifer R. Lightdale; V. Raman Muthusamy; John R. Saltzman; Brooks D. Cash

This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) prepared this text. In preparing this document, a search of the medical literature pertaining to this topic published between January 1990–March 2013 was performed by using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When few or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Recommendations for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time that the documents are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this document. This document represents an updated review of previous ASGE guidance on this topic. This document may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommendations are based on reviewed studies and are graded on the strength of the supporting evidence (Table 1). The strength of individual recommendations is based on both the aggregate evidence quality and an assessment of the anticipated benefits and harms. Weaker recommendations are indicated by phrases such as “We suggest.” whereas stronger recommendations are typically stated as “We recommend. .” This document is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. It is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient’s condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these recommendations.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2015

The role of endoscopy in the management of premalignant and malignant conditions of the stomach

John A. Evans; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; G. Anton Decker; Dayna S. Early; Deborah A. Fisher; Kimberly Foley; Joo Ha Hwang; Terry L. Jue; Jenifer R. Lightdale; Shabana F. Pasha; Ravi Sharaf; Amandeep K. Shergill; Brooks D. Cash; John M. DeWitt

This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed from January 1980 through March 2014 by using the keyword(s) “gastric tumor, ”“ gastric cancer, ”“ gastric lymphoma, ”“ gastric and adenocarcinoma, ”“ gastrointestinal stromal tumor,” “gastrointestinal endoscopy, ”“ endoscopy, ”“ endoscopic procedures,” and “procedures.” The search was supplemented by accessing the “related articles” feature of PubMed, with articles identified on PubMed as the references. Pertinent studies published in English were reviewed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When little or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for the appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time that the guidelines are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommendations were based on reviewed studies and were graded on the strength of the supporting evidence by using the GRADE criteria (Table 1). 1 This guideline is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. This guideline is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient’sconditionandavailablecoursesofaction.Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these guidelines.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2013

Endoscopic mucosal tissue sampling

Ravi Sharaf; Amandeep K. Shergill; Robert D. Odze; Mary L. Krinsky; Norio Fukami; Rajeev Jain; Vasundhara Appalaneni; Michelle A. Anderson; Tamir Ben-Menachem; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; G. Anton Decker; Dana S. Early; John A. Evans; Robert D. Fanelli; Deborah A. Fisher; Laurel Fisher; Kimberly Foley; Joo Ha Hwang; Terry L. Jue; Steven O. Ikenberry; Khalid M. Khan; Jennifer Lightdale; Phyllis M. Malpas; John T. Maple; Shabana F. Pasha; John R. Saltzman; Jason A. Dominitz; Brooks D. Cash

This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When few or no data exist from welldesigned prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time that the guidelines are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommendations are based on reviewed studies and are graded on the strength of the supporting evidence (Table 1). The strength of individual recommendations is based on both the aggregate evidence quality and an assessment of the anticipated benefits and harms. Weaker recommendations are indicated by phrases such as “We suggest.,” whereas stronger recommendations are typically stated as “We recommend..” These statements are included in Table 2, rather than as specific statements, as in other Standards of Practice documents. This guideline is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. This guideline is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient’s condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these guidelines.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2009

EUS-guided transesophageal, transgastric, and transcolonic drainage of intra-abdominal fluid collections and abscesses

Cyrus R. Piraka; Raj J. Shah; Norio Fukami; Krishnavel V. Chathadi; Yang K. Chen

BACKGROUND The therapeutic role of EUS is evolving. We report our experience with EUS-guided transesophageal, transgastric, and transcolonic drainage of various intra-abdominal fluid collections. OBJECTIVE To determine the technical feasibility and clinical outcomes of EUS-guided drainage. DESIGN Prospective case series. SETTING Academic tertiary referral center. PATIENTS Patients referred for endoscopic drainage of intra-abdominal fluid collections; pancreatic pseudocysts amenable to conventional transgastric or transduodenal drainage were excluded. INTERVENTIONS Single-step EUS-guided drainage of fluid collections by using a therapeutic linear-array echoendoscope with fluoroscopic guidance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Technical success, relief of symptoms, and procedural complications. RESULTS Nine consecutive patients deemed appropriate for EUS-guided drainage of intra-abdominal fluid collections included transesophageal drainage of pseudocysts (n = 2), transgastric drainage of biloma (n = 2) and upper intra-abdominal abscesses (n = 2), transcolonic drainage of diverticular abscess (n = 1), Crohns abscess (n = 1), and postoperative hematoma (n = 1). Endoscopic drainage was successful in all patients. Confirmation of complete resolution of the target fluid collection and symptom relief was achieved in 8 (89%) of 9 patients. Pneumothorax and mediastinitis developed in 1 patient after transesophageal drainage, which resolved with chest tube and medical therapy. During multiple stent placement, one of the stents was fully deployed into the abscess cavity in 2 patients; both were successfully retrieved either endoscopically (Crohns abscess) or at the time of primary colonic resection (diverticular abscess). LIMITATION Limited number of patients. CONCLUSIONS EUS-guided transenteric drainage of bilomas, hematomas, abscesses, and inflammatory fluid collections is technically feasible and generally results in complete drainage and symptom relief. Procedural complications may be minimized with more experience.

Collaboration


Dive into the Krishnavel V. Chathadi's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Brooks D. Cash

Walter Reed National Military Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jenifer R. Lightdale

University of Massachusetts Amherst

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

John R. Saltzman

Brigham and Women's Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Joo Ha Hwang

University of Washington

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge