Bechara, Robert

ObjectivesAchalasia is an esophageal motility disorder that impairs quality of life and is often missed (20–50%) on endoscopy. A newly developed computer‐aided detection (CAD) software has shown high accuracy for achalasia diagnosis in preclinical settings. However, its benefit in a clinical setting remains unclear.MethodsBetween February and August 2023, 83 endoscopists from 27 centers assessed 50 randomized endoscopic videos (25 achalasia, 25 nonachalasia) without and with CAD. Endoscopists assessed videos without CAD, then with CAD after 2 months. The primary end‐point was improvement in sensitivity for nonexperienced endoscopists (no endoscopic experience of achalasia). Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy with and without CAD were compared using the McNemar test.ResultsSensitivity for diagnosing achalasia increased significantly with CAD, rising from 74.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 72.2–76.0%) to 91.2% (95% CI 89.9–92.4%) for all readers, showing a difference of 17.1% (95% CI 15.1–19.0%). Specifically, sensitivity improved from 66.9% (95% CI 63.6–70.0%) to 91.9% (95% CI 89.9–93.6%) among nonexperienced endoscopists, resulting in a difference of 25.0% (95% CI 21.7–28.4%), and from 79.5% (95% CI 77.1–81.8%) to 90.8% (95% CI 89.0–92.3%) among experienced endoscopists (endoscopic experience of at least one achalasia case), with a difference of 11.3% (95% CI 8.9–13.6%). Accuracy and specificity improved significantly with CAD assistance, regardless of reader's experience.ConclusionCAD improves achalasia detection by 17%, confirming preclinical results. The benefit was higher for nonexperienced endoscopists. CAD assistance may lead to prompt and effective treatment, minimizing the risk of false‐negative diagnosis in clinical practice.Trial registrationThis study was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry (https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/) number: UMIN000053047.

Abstract Background Real-time endoscopic optical diagnosis involves detailed visualization of the digestive mucosal and microvascular pattern, allowing for prediction of histology. This is advantageous as it can guide endoscopic resection decisions, surgical referrals and provide cost savings to histopathology. There is, however, no standardized or widely implemented curriculum for endoscopists or trainees to learn optical diagnosis skills. Aims To evaluate the impact of a course for the optical diagnosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), early gastric cancer (EGC), Barrett’s esophagus (BE), and colorectal polyps Methods 19 gastroenterology trainees were invited to the 2-day course in Kingston, Canada. Number of procedures previously performed was recorded. The impact of the course on lesion diagnosis accuracy was evaluated using a pre-test, immediate post-test, and delayed post-test administered 6 weeks after the course. A repeated measures ANOVA was performed to compare the mean score (%) between the three tests. Results 13 trainees completed all the tests (Table 1). Mean score % values for the overall tests and test scores for esophageal, gastric, and colon lesions were summarized on Table 1. The repeated measures ANOVA determined that the mean score % had a statistically significant difference between the three tests (F (2,24)=5.63, P=0.01). Pairwise comparisons revealed that there was a statistically significant increase in mean scores between pre- and post-tests (13.86 (95% confidence interval (CI) of 4.36 to 23.33), p<0.01) with no significant difference between post and delayed post-tests (8.46 (95% CI of -0.12 to 17.04), p>0.05) (Figure 1). The mean correct % from the delayed post-test was higher than the pre-test but there was no statistical significance (5.39 (95% CI of -3.72 to 14.49), p>0.05). Conclusions This novel optical diagnosis course improved trainee accuracy in diagnosing ESCC, EGC, BE and colorectal polyps. Learning retention was evident, with no significant score difference between immediate and delayed post-tests. This study was limited by the low sample size and low number of test items. Further investigation is required to validate the course for international trainees and explore its clinical transferability. Demography and Mean Score % Figure 1. Mean score %. (*) denotes p<0.05. Funding Agencies None

Abstract Background and study aims Use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy is an essential aid in advanced endoscopic interventions. However, it also raises concerns about radiation exposure. This study aimed to develop consensus-based statements for safe and effective use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy, prioritizing the safety and well-being of healthcare workers and patients. Methods A modified Delphi approach was employed to achieve consensus over three rounds of surveys. Proposed statements were generated in Round 1. In the second round, panelists rated potential statements on a 5-point scale, with consensus defined as ≥80% agreement. Statements were subsequently prioritized in Round 3, using a 1 (lowest priority) to 10 (highest priority) scale. Results Forty-six experts participated, consisting of 34 therapeutic endoscopists and 12 endoscopy nurses from six continents, with an overall 45.6% female representation (n = 21). Forty-three item statements were generated in the first round. Of these, 31 statements achieved consensus after the second round. These statements were categorized into General Considerations (n = 6), Education (n = 10), Pregnancy (n = 4), Family Planning (n = 2), Patient Safety (n = 4), and Staff Safety (n = 5). In the third round, accepted statements received mean priority scores ranging from 7.28 to 9.36, with 87.2% of statements rated as very high priority (mean score ≥ 9). Conclusions This study presents consensus-based statements for safe and effective use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy, addressing the well-being of healthcare workers and patients. These consensus-based statements aim to mitigate risks associated with radiation exposure while maintaining benefits of fluoroscopy, ultimately promoting a culture of safety in healthcare settings.

ObjectivesThere have been significant advances in the management of large (≥20 mm) laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) or nonpedunculated colorectal polyps; however, there is a lack of clear consensus on the management of these lesions with significant geographic variability especially between Eastern and Western paradigms. We aimed to provide an international consensus to better guide management and attempt to homogenize practices.MethodsTwo experts in interventional endoscopy spearheaded an evidence‐based Delphi study on behalf of the World Endoscopy Organization Colorectal Cancer Screening Committee. A steering committee comprising six members devised 51 statements, and 43 experts from 18 countries on six continents participated in a three‐round voting process. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations tool was used to assess evidence quality and recommendation strength. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement (strongly agree or agree) on a 5‐point Likert scale.ResultsForty‐two statements reached consensus after three rounds of voting. Recommendations included: three statements on training and competency; 10 statements on preresection evaluation, including optical diagnosis, classification, and staging of LSTs; 14 statements on endoscopic resection indications and technique, including statements on en bloc and piecemeal resection decision‐making; seven statements on postresection evaluation; and eight statements on postresection care.ConclusionsAn international expert consensus based on the current available evidence has been developed to guide the evaluation, resection, and follow‐up of LSTs. This may provide guiding principles for the global management of these lesions and standardize current practices.

Abstract Background and Aim Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an internationally accepted technique for the resection of superficial gastrointestinal neoplasia. ESD allows for en‐bloc removal when endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is unsuitable due to the size or depth of the lesion. The aim of this survey was to examine Canadian clinicians' experience and perceptions of ESD as its prevalence increases across the country. Methods An electronic survey consisting of 24 multiple‐choice questions was distributed via the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology email database and directly to those known to be performing or interested in ESD. The survey covered training, practice, obstacles in implementation, and perceptions of the future of ESD in Canada. Results A total of 21 participants completed the survey. ESD was performed primarily in the endoscopy suite exclusively (71%), and most operators (64%) performed it on an outpatient basis. Procedure time was selected as the greatest technical challenge in the performance of ESD by 86% of the participants. Both lack of formalized training and long procedure times were the highest ranked barriers to the adoption of ESD. Over the next 5 years, 95% believed there would be an increase in ESD volume in Canada, and 43% believed ESD was ready for adoption by more therapeutic endoscopists. Interpretation In this survey, we explored the current practice, attitude, and challenges of ESD in the Canadian landscape. As the performance of ESD increases and gains more acceptance across Canada, there are opportunities to address technical challenges and barriers through the formalization of training, education, and practice guidelines.