Tony C K Tham

Consensus Statements for Management of Barrett's Dysplasia and Early-Stage Esophageal Adenocarcinoma, Based on a Delphi Process

BACKGROUND & AIMSnEsophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) is increasingly common among patients with Barretts esophagus (BE). We aimed to provide consensus recommendations based on the medical literature that clinicians could use to manage patients with BE and low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia (HGD), or early-stage EA.nnnMETHODSnWe performed an international, multidisciplinary, systematic, evidence-based review of different management strategies for patients with BE and dysplasia or early-stage EA. We used a Delphi process to develop consensus statements. The results of literature searches were screened using a unique, interactive, Web-based data-sifting platform; we used 11,904 papers to inform the choice of statements selected. An a priori threshold of 80% agreement was used to establish consensus for each statement.nnnRESULTSnEighty-one of the 91 statements achieved consensus despite generally low quality of evidence, including 8 clinical statements: (1) specimens from endoscopic resection are better than biopsies for staging lesions, (2) it is important to carefully map the size of the dysplastic areas, (3) patients that receive ablative or surgical therapy require endoscopic follow-up, (4) high-resolution endoscopy is necessary for accurate diagnosis, (5) endoscopic therapy for HGD is preferred to surveillance, (6) endoscopic therapy for HGD is preferred to surgery, (7) the combination of endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation is the most effective therapy, and (8) after endoscopic removal of lesions from patients with HGD, all areas of BE should be ablated.nnnCONCLUSIONSnWe developed a data-sifting platform and used the Delphi process to create evidence-based consensus statements for the management of patients with BE and early-stage EA. This approach identified important clinical features of the diseases and areas for future studies.

How do patients with inflammatory bowel disease want their biological therapy administered

BackgroundInfliximab is usually administered by two monthly intravenous (iv) infusions, therefore requiring visits to hospital. Adalimumab is administered by self subcutaneous (sc) injections every other week. Both of these anti-TNF drugs appear to be equally efficacious in the treatment of Crohns Disease and therefore the decision regarding which drug to choose will depend to some extent on patient choice, which may be based on the mode of administration.The aims of this study were to compare preferences in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) patients for two currently available anti-TNF agents and the reasons for their choices.MethodsAn anonymous questionnaire was distributed to IBD patients who had attended the Gastroenterology service (Ulster Hospital, Dundonald, Belfast, N. Ireland. UK) between January 2007 and December 2007. The patients were asked in a hypothetical situation if the following administering methods of anti-TNF drugs (intravenous or subcutaneous) were available, which drug route of administration would they choose.ResultsOne hundred and twenty-five patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were issued questionnaires, of these 78 questionnaires were returned (62 percent response). The mean age of respondent was 44 years. Of the total number of respondents, 33 patients (42 percent) preferred infliximab and 19 patients (24 percent) preferred adalimumab (p = 0.07). Twenty-six patients (33 percent) did not indicate a preference for either biological therapy and were not included in the final analysis. The commonest reason cited for those who chose infliximab (iv) was: I do not like the idea of self-injecting, (67 percent). For those patients who preferred adalimumab (sc) the commonest reason cited was: I prefer the convenience of injecting at home, (79 percent). Of those patients who had previously been treated with an anti-TNF therapy (n = 10, all infliximab) six patients stated that they would prefer infliximab if given the choice in the future (p = 0.75).ConclusionsThere was a trend towards patient preference for infliximab (iv) treatment as opposed to adalimumab (sc) in patients with IBD. This difference may be due to the frequency of administration, mode of administration or differing times in the market-place, as infliximab had been approved for a longer period of time in Crohns disease. Further studies are required in IBD patients to investigate whether patient choice will affect compliance, patient satisfaction and efficacy of treatment with anti-TNF therapies.

Papillary cannulation and sphincterotomy techniques at ERCP: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline.

This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). It provides practical advice on how to achieve successful cannulation and sphincterotomy at minimum risk to the patient. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. Main recommendations 1 ESGE suggests that difficult biliary cannulation is defined by the presence of one or more of the following: more than 5 contacts with the papilla whilst attempting to cannulate; more than 5 minutes spent attempting to cannulate following visualization of the papilla; more than one unintended pancreatic duct cannulation or opacification (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). 2 ESGE recommends the guidewire-assisted technique for primary biliary cannulation, since it reduces the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 3 ESGE recommends using pancreatic guidewire (PGW)-assisted biliary cannulation in patients where biliary cannulation is difficult and repeated unintentional access to the main pancreatic duct occurs (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). ESGE recommends attempting prophylactic pancreatic stenting in all patients with PGW-assisted attempts at biliary cannulation (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 4 ESGE recommends needle-knife fistulotomy as the preferred technique for precutting (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). ESGE suggests that precutting should be used only by endoscopists who achieve selective biliary cannulation in more than 80u200a% of cases using standard cannulation techniques (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). When access to the pancreatic duct is easy to obtain, ESGE suggests placement of a pancreatic stent prior to precutting (moderate quality evidence, weak recommendation). 5 ESGE recommends that in patients with a small papilla that is difficult to cannulate, transpancreatic biliary sphincterotomy should be considered if unintentional insertion of a guidewire into the pancreatic duct occurs (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation).In patients who have had transpancreatic sphincterotomy, ESGE suggests prophylactic pancreatic stenting (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 6 ESGE recommends that mixed current is used for sphincterotomy rather than pure cut current alone, as there is a decreased risk of mild bleeding with the former (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 7 ESGE suggests endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) as an alternative to endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) for extracting CBD stones <u200a8u200amm in patients without anatomical or clinical contraindications, especially in the presence of coagulopathy or altered anatomy (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 8 ESGE does not recommend routine biliary sphincterotomy for patients undergoing pancreatic sphincterotomy, and suggests that it is reserved for patients in whom there is evidence of coexisting bile duct obstruction or biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (moderate quality evidence, weak recommendation). 9 In patients with periampullary diverticulum (PAD) and difficult cannulation, ESGE suggests that pancreatic duct stent placement followed by precut sphincterotomy or needle-knife fistulotomy are suitable options to achieve cannulation (low quality evidence, weak recommendation).ESGE suggests that EST is safe in patients with PAD. In cases where EST is technically difficult to complete as a result of a PAD, large stone removal can be facilitated by a small EST combined with EPBD or use of EPBD alone (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). 10 For cannulation of the minor papilla, ESGE suggests using wire-guided cannulation, with or without contrast, and sphincterotomy with a pull-type sphincterotome or a needle-knife over a plastic stent (low quality evidence, weak recommendation).When cannulation of the minor papilla is difficult, ESGE suggests secretin injection, which can be preceded by methylene blue spray in the duodenum (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). 11 In patients with choledocholithiasis who are scheduled for elective cholecystectomy, ESGE suggests intraoperative ERCP with laparoendoscopic rendezvous (moderate quality evidence, weak recommendation). ESGE suggests that when biliary cannulation is unsuccessful with a standard retrograde approach, anterograde guidewire insertion either by a percutaneous or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided approach can be used to achieve biliary access (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). 12 ESGE suggests that in patients with Billroth II gastrectomy ERCP should be performed in referral centers, with the side-viewing endoscope as a first option; forward-viewing endoscopes are the second choice in cases of failure (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). A straight standard ERCP catheter or an inverted sphincterotome, with or without the guidewire, is recommended by ESGE for biliopancreatic cannulation in patients who have undergone Billroth II gastrectomy (low quality evidence, strong recommendation). Endoscopic papillary ballon dilation (EPBD) is suggested as an alternative to sphincterotomy for stone extraction in the setting of patients with Billroth II gastrectomy (low quality evidence, weak recommendation).In patients with complex post-surgical anatomy ESGE suggests referral to a center where device-assisted enteroscopy techniques are available (very low quality evidence, weak recommendation).

BOB CAT: a Large-Scale Review and Delphi Consensus for Management of Barrett’s Esophagus With No Dysplasia, Indefinite for, or Low-Grade Dysplasia

OBJECTIVES:Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a common premalignant lesion for which surveillance is recommended. This strategy is limited by considerable variations in clinical practice. We conducted an international, multidisciplinary, systematic search and evidence-based review of BE and provided consensus recommendations for clinical use in patients with nondysplastic, indefinite, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD).METHODS:We defined the scope, proposed statements, and searched electronic databases, yielding 20,558 publications that were screened, selected online, and formed the evidence base. We used a Delphi consensus process, with an 80% agreement threshold, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to categorize the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.RESULTS:In total, 80% of respondents agreed with 55 of 127 statements in the final voting rounds. Population endoscopic screening is not recommended and screening should target only very high-risk cases of males aged over 60 years with chronic uncontrolled reflux. A new international definition of BE was agreed upon. For any degree of dysplasia, at least two specialist gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists are required. Risk factors for cancer include male gender, length of BE, and central obesity. Endoscopic resection should be used for visible, nodular areas. Surveillance is not recommended for <5 years of life expectancy. Management strategies for indefinite dysplasia (IND) and LGD were identified, including a de-escalation strategy for lower-risk patients and escalation to intervention with follow-up for higher-risk patients.CONCLUSIONS:In this uniquely large consensus process in gastroenterology, we made key clinical recommendations for the escalation/de-escalation of BE in clinical practice. We made strong recommendations for the prioritization of future research.

Pancreatic duct stents for “obstructive type” pain in pancreatic malignancy

Abstract OBJECTIVE: Obstruction of the main pancreatic duct from malignancy with secondary ductal hypertension may be an important contributor to pain. The aim of our study was to determine the efficacy and safety of pancreatic stent placement for patients with “obstructive” pain due to pancreatic malignancy. METHODS: Pancreatic duct stents were placed in 10 consecutive patients with malignant pancreatic duct obstruction and abdominal pain. Seven patients had “obstructive” type pain and three had chronic unremitting pain. Nine had primary pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and one had metastatic melanoma. There were eight women and two men. Mean age was 61 yr (range, 47–80 yr). All patients had dominant main pancreatic duct strictures with proximal dilation. Tumors were unresectable. All patients took potent analgesics before endoscopic stent therapy. Polyethylene pancreatic stents, 5- and 7-French, were successfully placed in seven patients, and self-expanding metallic stents were successfully placed in three patients. RESULTS: There were no procedure-related complications. One patient required a single repeat examination to replace a migrated stent. Seven patients (75%) experienced a reduction in pain. Analgesia was no longer required in five (50%). Three patients who did not improve had chronic pain rather than “obstructive” pain. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic stent placement for patients with “obstructive” pain secondary to a malignant pancreatic duct stricture appears to be safe and effective. It should be considered as a therapeutic option in these patients. It does not seem to be effective for chronic unremitting pain.

Enteroscopy in small bowel Crohn's disease: A review.

Crohns disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory condition of the gastrointestinal tract resulting in inflammation, stricturing and fistulae secondary to transmural inflammation. Diagnosis relies on clinical history, abnormal laboratory parameters, characteristic radiologic and endoscopic changes within the gastrointestinal tract and most importantly a supportive histology. The article is intended mainly for the general gastroenterologist and for other interested physicians. Management of small bowel CD has been suboptimal and limited due to the inaccessibility of the small bowel. Enteroscopy has had a significant renaissance recently, thereby extending the reach of the endoscopist, aiding diagnosis and enabling therapeutic interventions in the small bowel. Radiologic imaging is used as the first line modality to visualise the small bowel. If the clinical suspicion is high, wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) is used to rule out superficial and early disease, despite the above investigations being normal. This is followed by push enteroscopy or device assisted enteroscopy (DAE) as is appropriate. This approach has been found to be the most cost effective and least invasive. DAE includes balloon-assisted enteroscopy, [double balloon enteroscopy (DBE), single balloon enteroscopy (SBE) and more recently spiral enteroscopy (SE)]. This review is not going to cover the various other indications of enteroscopy, radiological small bowel investigations nor WCE and limited only to enteroscopy in small bowel Crohns. These excluded topics already have comprehensive reviews. Evidence available from randomized controlled trials comparing the various modalities is limited and at best regarded as Grade C or D (based on expert opinion). The evidence suggests that all three DAE modalities have comparable insertion depths, diagnostic and therapeutic efficacies and complication rates, though most favour DBE due to higher rates of total enteroscopy. SE is quicker than DBE, but lower complete enteroscopy rates. SBE has quicker procedural times and is evolving but the least available DAE today. Larger prospective randomised controlled trials in the future could help us understand some unanswered areas including the role of BAE in small bowel screening and comparative studies between the main types of enteroscopy in small bowel CD.

Are accelerated infliximab infusions safe in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Background: Infliximab is a monoclonal antibody used in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The manufacturer‐recommended administration is over 2 hours followed by 2 hours of patient observation. The data relating to adverse outcomes in patients receiving accelerated infusions for IBD are limited. Methods: Our unit utilizes an accelerated protocol for infliximab infusion in selected patients with IBD (those with no adverse reaction in their first four standard infusions). Our aim was to assess if the accelerated infusion protocol (infusion over 1 hour or 30 minutes with 1 hour or no monitoring according to protocol) was associated with any increase in adverse outcomes. Data were collected retrospectively on protocol used and adverse outcomes for all infliximab infusions between October 2005 and June 2008. Results: Out of 69 patients, 27 received the accelerated protocol (130 infusions). All patients received a total of 306 infusions on the standard protocol. No adverse reactions were reported in the accelerated protocol patients. In patients on the standard protocol, 16 adverse reactions were observed: seven were acute (occurring during infusion); nine were delayed (occurring within 1–7 days following infusion). No patient required intramuscular adrenaline or hospitalization. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that an accelerated protocol for infliximab infusion is well tolerated in selected patients. The monitoring period following infusion may not be necessary, as all acute reactions occurred within an hour of initiating infusion and did not warrant hospitalization. The accelerated infusion may allow more efficient utilization of hospital resources and reduce patient inconvenience. (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2010)

Endoscopic placement of enteral feeding tubes.

Malnutrition is common in patients with acute and chronic illness. Nutritional management of these malnourished patients is an essential part of healthcare. Enteral feeding is one component of nutritional support. It is the preferred method of nutritional support in patients that are not receiving adequate oral nutrition and have a functioning gastrointestinal tract (GIT). This method of nutritional support has undergone progression over recent times. The method of placement of enteral feeding tubes has evolved due to development of new feeding tubes and endoscopic technology. Enteral feeding can be divided into methods that provide short-term and long-term access to the GIT. This review article focuses on the current range of methods of gaining access to the GIT to provide enteral feed.

Out of programme experience and training: going away to bring something back

During postgraduate gastroenterology specialty training in the UK, a number of opportunities will arise for which a trainee may want to take some time out of their specialty training programme—that is, an out of programme (OOP) activity.nnThere are four types[1][1] of OOP activity:- nnThis article

British Society of Gastroenterology policy and processes for the development of guidelines

We refer to two recently published guidelines in this journal from the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) on coeliac disease1 and Barretts oesophagus.2 We describe our BSG policy on the production of guidelines, which sets a sufficiently high quality benchmark such that we have been awarded National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) accreditation for our production process.3 The full policy and advice document are available on our website.4nnMost guidelines are commissioned by the BSG clinical services and standards committee (CSSC). The formulation of guidelines are driven by a Guideline Development Group (GDG), include a writing committee, members of which are recognised authorities in the field, and others representing a range of relevant expertise, …