Network


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

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Robert D. Fanelli is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Robert D. Fanelli.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2002

Guideline for the management of ingested foreign bodies.

Glenn M. Eisen; Todd H. Baron; Jason A. Dominitz; Douglas O. Faigel; Jay L. Goldstein; John F. Johanson; J.Shawn Mallery; Hareth M. Raddawi; John J. Vargo; J. Patrick Waring; Robert D. Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbough

This is one of a series of statements discussing the utilization of gastrointestinal 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 MEDLINE literature search was performed, and 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 appropriate utilization of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Further controlled clinical studies are needed to clarify aspects of this statement, and revision may be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance to these recommendations.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2009

Management of antithrombotic agents for endoscopic procedures

Michelle A. Anderson; Tamir Ben-Menachem; S. Ian Gan; Vasundhara Appalaneni; Subhas Banerjee; Brooks D. Cash; Laurel Fisher; M. Edwyn Harrison; Robert D. Fanelli; Norio Fukami; Steven O. Ikenberry; Rajeev Jain; Khalid M. Khan; Mary L. Krinsky; David R. Lichtenstein; John T. Maple; Bo Shen; Laura Strohmeyer; Todd H. Baron; Jason A. Dominitz

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. This guideline combines and updates 2 previously issued guidelines, ‘‘Guideline on the management of antithrombotic and antiplatelet therapy for endoscopic procedures’’ and ‘‘ASGE guideline: the management of lowmolecular-weight heparin and nonaspirin antiplatelet agents for endoscopic procedures.’’ To prepare this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed using PubMed. Studies or reports that described fewer than 10 patients were excluded from analysis if multiple series with more than 10 patients addressing the same issue were available. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. 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 are based on reviewed studies and were 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 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 this guideline.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2003

Complications of ERCP

Michelle A. Anderson; Laurel Fisher; Rajeev Jain; John A. Evans; Vasundhara Appalaneni; Tamir Ben-Menachem; Brooks D. Cash; G. Anton Decker; Dayna S. Early; Robert D. Fanelli; Deborah A. Fisher; Norio Fukami; Joo Ha Hwang; Steven O. Ikenberry; Terry L. Jue; Khalid M. Khan; Mary L. Krinsky; Phyllis M. Malpas; John T. Maple; Ravi Sharaf; Amandeep K. Shergill; Jason A. Dominitz

d ( t s f t c s n d i a s a This is one of a series of position 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. This document is an update of a previous ASGE publication.1 In preparing this document, a search of the medical iterature was performed using PubMed. Additional refernces were obtained from the bibliographies of the identied articles and from recommendations of expert consulants. When limited or no data exist from well-designed rospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large eries and reports from recognized experts. Position stateents are based on a critical review of the available data nd expert consensus at the time that the document was rafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed o clarify aspects of this document, which may be revised s necessary to account for changes in technology, new ata, or other aspects of clinical practice. This document is intended to be an educational device o provide information that may assist endoscopists in roviding care to patients. This position statement is not a ule and should not be construed as establishing a legal tandard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requirng, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical ecisions in any particular case involve a complex analsis of the patient’s condition and available courses of ction. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an ndoscopist to take a course of action that varies from this osition statement. Since its introduction in 1968, ERCP has become a comonly performed endoscopic procedure.2 The diagnostic nd therapeutic utility of ERCP has been well demonstrated or a variety of disorders, including the management of choedocholithiasis, the diagnosis and management of biliary nd pancreatic neoplasms, and the postoperative manageent of biliary perioperative complications.3-5 The evolution of the role of ERCP has occurred simultaneously with that of other diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, most notably magnetic resonance imaging/MRCP, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (with or without intraoperative cholangiography), and EUS. For endoscopists to accurately assess the clinical appropriateness of ERCP, it is important to have a thorough


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2002

Guideline on the management of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy for endoscopic procedures

Glenn M. Eisen; Todd H. Baron; Jason A. Dominitz; Douglas O. Faigel; Jay L. Goldstein; John F. Johanson; J.Shawn Mallery; Hareth M. Raddawi; John J. Vargo; J. Patrick Waring; Robert D. Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbough

This is one of a series of statements discussing the practice of gastrointestinal endoscopy in common clinical situations. It is intended to aid endoscopists in determining the appropriate use of endoscopic procedures in conjunction with anticoagulation and/or antiplatelet therapy. Guidelines for the appropriate practice of endoscopy are based on critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Controlled clinical studies would be beneficial to clarify some aspects of this statement and revision might be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance from these specific recommendations.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2003

Complications of colonoscopy

Deborah A. Fisher; John T. Maple; Tamir Ben-Menachem; Brooks D. Cash; G. Anton Decker; Dayna S. Early; John A. Evans; Robert D. Fanelli; Norio Fukami; Joo Ha Hwang; Rajeev Jain; Terry L. Jue; Khalid M. Khan; Phyllis M. Malpas; Ravi Sharaf; Amandeep K. Shergill; Jason A. Dominitz

Summary Endoscopic complications are rare but inevitable, occurring in fewer than 0.35% of procedures [B]. Knowledge of potential complications and their expected frequency can lead to an improved informed consent process [C]. Complications from the procedure include perforation, hemorrhage, postpolypectomy coagulation syndrome, infection, preparation-associated complications, and death, and are more likely to occur with therapeutic procedures rather than diagnostic procedures [B]. Risk factors for poylpectomy-associated complications include the location and size of the polyp, experience of the operator, polypectomy technique and possibly the type of electrocoagulation current used [B]. Use of saline solution injection under large sessile polyps decreases depth of thermal injury [A] and may decrease complications [B]. Early recognition of complications and prompt intervention may decrease patient morbidity [C]. Treatment of complications range from supportive for postpolypectomy coagulation syndrome, to repeat colonoscopy with injection or electrocoagulation for bleeding, to surgical repair for free perforation [B]. Consideration of the risks and benefits may improve clinical outcome by identifying potential complications and taking appropriate steps to minimize the risks [C].


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2010

The role of endoscopy in the evaluation of suspected choledocholithiasis

John T. Maple; Tamir Ben-Menachem; Michelle A. Anderson; Vasundhara Appalaneni; Subhas Banerjee; Brooks D. Cash; Laurel Fisher; M. Edwyn Harrison; Robert D. Fanelli; Norio Fukami; Steven O. Ikenberry; Rajeev Jain; Khalid M. Khan; Mary L. Krinsky; Laura Strohmeyer; Jason A. Dominitz

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 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. 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 were based on reviewed studies and were graded on the strength of the supporting evidence (Table 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’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. Gallstone disease affects more than 20 million American adults at an annual cost of


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2011

Management of ingested foreign bodies and food impactions

Steven O. Ikenberry; Terry L. Jue; Michelle A. Anderson; Vasundhara Appalaneni; Subhas Banerjee; Tamir Ben-Menachem; G. Anton Decker; Robert D. Fanelli; Laurel Fisher; Norio Fukami; M. Edwyn Harrison; Rajeev Jain; Khalid M. Khan; Mary L. Krinsky; John T. Maple; Ravi Sharaf; Laura Strohmeyer; Jason A. Dominitz

6.2 billion. A subset of these patients will also have choledocholithiasis, including 5% to 10% of those undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis and 18% to 33% of patients with acute biliary pancreatitis. The approach to patients with suspected choledocholithiasis requires careful consideration because missed common bile duct (CBD) stones pose a risk of recurrent symptoms, pancreatitis, and cholangitis. However, the morbidity and cost


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2005

ASGE guideline: The role of endoscopy in the diagnosis and the management of cystic lesions and inflammatory fluid collections of the pancreas.

Brian C. Jacobson; Todd H. Baron; Douglas G. Adler; Raquel E. Davila; James Egan; William K. Hirota; Jonathan A. Leighton; Waqar A. Qureshi; Elizabeth Rajan; Marc J. Zuckerman; Robert D. Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbaugh; Douglas O. Faigel

i d t i i t i t f o 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. Studies or reports that described fewer than 10 patients were excluded from analysis if multiple series with more than 10 patients addressing the same issue were available. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. 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 original guideline was published in 1995 and last updated in 2002. The recommendations are based on reviewed studies and are graded on the strength of the supporting evidence (Table 1).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. 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 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

This is one of a series of statements discussing the utilization 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 MEDLINE literature search was performed and 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 appropriate utilization of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Further controlled clinical studies are needed to clarify aspects of this statement, and revision may be necessary as new data appear Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance to these recommendations.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2003

Guidelines for Antibiotic Prophylaxis for GI Endoscopy

William K. Hirota; Kathryn Petersen; Todd H. Baron; Jay L. Goldstein; Brian C. Jacobson; Jonathan A. Leighton; J.Shawn Mallery; J. Patrick Waring; Robert D. Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbough; Douglas O. Faigel

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.

Collaboration


Dive into the Robert D. Fanelli's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Todd H. Baron

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

View shared research outputs
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

Terry L. Jue

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Steven O. Ikenberry

Indiana University Bloomington

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Khalid M. Khan

MedStar Georgetown University Hospital

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge