Kolb, Jennifer M.

Introduction: Young-onset esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) often presents at advanced stages and is associated with poor outcomes. We aimed to examine the epidemiology of young-onset Barrett’s esophagus (BE) using the TriNetX database. Methods: Young-onset BE patients (age 18 to younger than 50 y) with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) within 1 year before index BE diagnosis between 2014 and 2023 were included. Negative binomial regression was used to evaluate incident-time trends, and logistic regression to assess for independent predictors of young-onset BE. Results: BE diagnosis was present in 76,691 (3.3%) of 2,337,786 patients that underwent EGD, of which 14,120 (18%) had prevalent young-onset BE. BE dysplasia/EAC was present in 6% of young-onset patients at initial diagnosis. Conventional BE risk factors also predicted young-onset BE: GERD (OR=2.4), White race (OR=2.4), male sex (OR=2.2), smoking (OR=1.2), and obesity (OR=1.1). Each additional risk factor increased the probability of BE prevalence by 74% in young patients versus 54% in older patients. The prevalence of young-onset BE was 4.5% with GERD and ≥3 additional risk factors, and 2.3% when ≥3 risk factors were present. Discussion: Young-onset BE accounts for 18% of all BE cases, demonstrates a striking 6% rate of dysplasia/neoplasia at initial diagnosis, and has a prevalence of 4.5% in those with GERD and ≥3 risk factors. These findings suggest that young-onset BE is an important patient population that merits further study. Additional studies are necessary to study the cost-effectiveness of BE screening in younger patients with multiple risk factors.

INTRODUCTION: Ongoing surveillance after successful endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia is essential to detect and manage recurrence. Despite established surveillance interval recommendations after complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM), patient compliance with repeat endoscopy is frequently suboptimal. Understanding patient drivers to adherence is essential to inform interventions that address the high rates of overdue surveillance and loss to follow-up. METHODS: Patients with BE-related neoplasia who achieved CE-IM were eligible for inclusion and classified as delayed or on-time for endoscopic surveillance. Patients were prospectively enrolled and participated in structured virtual interviews designed to explore barriers and facilitators to on-time care. A rapid qualitative analysis approach was applied, continuing until thematic saturation was reached. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were interviewed: 22 (56.4%) were delayed, and 17 (43.6%) were on-time for surveillance. Patients in the delayed group had longer mean BE segment lengths and a higher prevalence of tobacco use. Geographic distance from the treatment center was the most frequently cited barrier to follow-up (n = 17; 43.5%). Other common barriers were access limitations, financial concerns, misunderstanding of disease course, and test-related anxiety. DISCUSSION: Patient-related drivers of delay in postendoscopic eradication therapy surveillance are largely logistical, socioeconomical, and psychological in nature. Solutions to reduce the significant burden on the patient and achieve timely surveillance may include transitioning patients back to their local endoscopists after CE-IM or incorporating nonendoscopic surveillance methods through patient centered approaches.

Background/Objectives: Performing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in surgically altered gastrointestinal anatomy remains challenging, frequently necessitating the use of forward-viewing endoscopes. Given the challenge in endoscope selection based on the type of altered anatomy, the aim of this study was to examine ERCP success rates by specific endoscopes for different anatomy types. Methods: This single-center retrospective study examined ERCPs performed in patients with surgically altered gastrointestinal anatomy during an 18-year period. Enteroscopy success, cannulation success, and intervention success rates were compared between the different anatomy and endoscope types. Results: This study included a total of 334 adult patients (665 total ERCPs) with altered anatomy. The pediatric colonoscope was most frequently utilized (32.2%), and the majority of procedures were performed for biliary indications. Enteroscopy success was 82.2% in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 97% in Billroth II, 91.5% in Whipple, and 93.2% in Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy (RYHJ). Cannulation success was 90.5% in RYGB, 90.5% in Billroth II, 83.6% in Whipple, and 90.6% in RYHJ. Intervention success was 88.2% in Billroth II, 65.1% in RYGB, 81.6% in Whipple, and 87.5% in RYHJ. In patients with RYGB and RYHJ, SBE was utilized most frequently, with rotational enteroscopy having the highest success rates. The overall adverse event rate was 5.1%, with the majority of these being mild in severity. Conclusions: This large retrospective study found ERCP with forward-viewing endoscopes to be safe and effective for a variety of surgically altered anatomy types. Despite recent advances seen with endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage procedures, this study advocates for ERCP as the initial approach for pancreaticobiliary access in surgically altered anatomy.

Abstract Background GERD is a common cause of chronic cough. Although barrier therapy with laparoscopic fundoplication is highly effective for typical GERD symptoms, the response rates are variable for chronic cough. We hypothesized that transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) or TIF with hiatal hernia repair (cTIF) may be a suitable alternative for medically refractory cough associated with GERD. Aim We prospectively s studied the effectiveness and safety of TIF/cTIF in patients with chronic cough and proven GERD. Methods Patients with GERD and extra-esophageal symptoms from 10 academic and community medical centers (TIF Registry), elevated GERD-HRQL score +/- Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) >13 and pathologic reflux by esophageal pH-metry, or erosive esophagitis/Barrett’s esophagus were evaluated before and after a minimum 6 months post TIF/cTIF performed by gastroenterologists and surgeons. Patients with history of prior foregut/bariatric surgery, chronic obstructive or interstitial lung disease, or prior lung transplant were excluded. The primary outcome was improvement in RSI score at last follow-up compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes were: 1) normalization of RSI (<13), 2) improvement in cough sub-scores of RSI (decrease ≥ 2 points or to 0 on a 5-point scale), 3) GERD symptom improvement (>50% decrease in GERD-HRQL, or < 2 in all sub-scores) 4) discontinuation of proton pump inhibitor (PPI), and 5) overall patient satisfaction. We further analyzed response in patients with cough-predominant phenotype (chief complaint of cough and RSI troublesome cough subscore ≥2). Results 198 patients with cough and GERD successfully underwent TIF/cTIF (Table 1) without serious adverse events. Greater than 6-month follow-up was available for 177 patients at a median of 12 months [IQR 6,12]. Median RSI score decreased from 18 [IQR 13, 27] to 5 [IQR 2, 11] (p < 0.0001), median change 11 [IQR5,11]. 83% of patients with elevated baseline RSI normalized their scores. 75% of patients had improvement of cough when lying down (median: 1 point [IQR 0,3]), and 72% of patients had improvement of troublesome cough (median: 1 point [IQR 1,3]). 83% of patients successfully discontinued or decreased PPI to occasional use. Patient satisfaction improved from a baseline of 5.6% to 68.8% (p <0.0001). Compared to patients without cough-predominant symptoms, cough-predominant patients (n=108) experienced an additional 4.2-point decrease in in RSI score (p = 0.01) and 1.5-point decrease in troublesome cough sub-scores (p<0.0001). Patients with regurgitation phenotype were more likely to have a favorable cough response at 6 months (p<0.0001). In appropriately selected patients, cTIF and TIF were comparable for cough, GERD-HRQL, RSI, and PPI responses. Conclusion TIF/cTIF are effective and safe alternative barrier therapies for patients with pH-positive cough-predominant GERD.

Abstract Background and study aims Concomitant hiatal hernia (HH) repair with transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) is a therapeutic option for patients with HH > 2 cm and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Data comparing this approach with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) are lacking. We performed an exploratory analysis to compare these two approaches' adverse events (AEs) and clinical outcomes. Patients and methods This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of HH repair followed by LNF versus HH repair followed by TIF in patients with GERD and moderate HH (2–5 cm). AEs were assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Symptoms (heartburn/regurgitation, bloating, and dysphagia) were compared at 6 and 12 months. Results A total of 125 patients with HH repair with TIF and 70 with HH repair with LNF were compared. There was no difference in rates of discontinuing or decreasing proton pump inhibitor use, dysphagia, esophagitis, disrupted wrap, and HH recurrence between the two groups (P > 0.05). The length of hospital stay (1 day vs. 2 days), 30-day readmission rate (0 vs. 4.3 %), early AE rate (0 vs. 18.6 %), and early serious AE rate (0 vs. 4.3 %) favored TIF (all P < 0.05). The rate of new or worse than baseline bloating was lower in the TIF group at 6 months (13.8 % vs. 30.0 %, P = 0.009). Conclusions Concomitant HH repair with TIF is feasible and associated with lower early and serious AEs compared to LNF. Further comparative efficacy studies are warranted.

Background/Aims: Barrett’s esophagus (BE), defined by the presence of intestinal metaplasia (IM) on histology, is thought to be the only identifiable precursor lesion for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Recent studies have suggested the possibility of an alternate, non-IM associated EAC that is a more aggressive form of EAC with worse survival. Among EAC patients, we aimed to compare survival of patients with and without IM at the time of diagnosis. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients with histologic confirmed EAC evaluated at a tertiary care center from 2013 to 2019. Cases were categorized according to the presence or absence of IM on histologic specimens (Group I—IM-EAC and Group II—non-IM-EAC). We compared demographic characteristics, clinical stage, therapy, and survival between the 2 groups using the Chi-square and ANOVA tests (for categorical and continuous variables, respectively). We used Cox proportional hazards regression to determine the association of IM with overall survival, adjusting for sex, age at diagnosis, tumor location, histologic grade, and clinical stage. Results: A total of 475 patients were included in this analysis (mean age 64.8 years [SD 10.8], 89% white) and 109 (23.0%) had no evidence of IM. Compared with IM-EAC (Group I), individuals in the non-IM-EAC group were younger ( P = .01) and had a greater proportion of patients diagnosed with advanced disease (49.5 vs 20.2% for stage 4, P < .001). These patients were less likely to undergo endoscopic therapy alone (0.92% vs 29.78%, P < .001) or surgery alone (0 vs 9.84%, P = .001). On multivariable analysis, the presence of IM-EAC was associated with improved overall survival compared to non-IM-EAC (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49-0.96). Additional factors associated with poor survival was increasing stage of diagnosis (HR 6.49: 95% CI 3.77-11.15 for stage 4, HR 2.19: 95% CI 1.25-3.84 for stage 3, HR 2.04: 95% CI 0.98-4.25 for stage 2 compared to stage 1) and more advanced histologic stage (HR 2.00, 95% CI 1.26-3.19) for poorly/undifferentiated compared to well differentiated). Conclusions: EAC without the presence of IM on histology was associated with worse survival compared to those with IM. Future prospective studies with detailed molecular sequencing are required to clarify if 2 separate phenotypes of EAC exist (IM-EAC and non-IM-EAC). If confirmed, this may have significant implications for screening and management strategies.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroenterologists at all levels of practice benefit from formal mentoring. Much of the current literature on mentoring in gastroenterology is based on expert opinion rather than data. In this study, we aimed to identify gender-related barriers to successful mentoring relationships from the mentor and mentee perspectives. METHODS: A voluntary, web-based survey was distributed to physicians at 20 academic institutions across the United States. Overall, 796 gastroenterology fellows and faculty received the survey link, with 334 physicians responding to the survey (42% response rate), of whom 299 (90%; 129 women and 170 men) completed mentorship questions and were included in analysis. RESULTS: Responses of women and men were compared. Compared with men, more women preferred a mentor of the same gender (38.6% women vs 4.2% men, P < 0.0001) but less often had one (45.5% vs 70.2%, P < 0.0001). Women also reported having more difficulty finding a mentor (44.4% vs 16.0%, P < 0.0001) and more often cited inability to identify a mentor of the same gender as a contributing factor (12.8% vs 0.9%, P = 0.0004). More women mentors felt comfortable advising women mentees about work-life balance (88.3% vs 63.8%, P = 0.0005). Nonetheless, fewer women considered themselves effective mentors (33.3% vs 52.6%, P = 0.03). More women reported feeling pressured to mentor because of their gender (39.5% vs 0.9% of men, P < 0.0001). Despite no gender differences, one-third of respondents reported negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their ability to mentor and be mentored. DISCUSSION: Inequities exist in the experiences of women mentees and mentors in gastroenterology, which may affect career advancement and job satisfaction.

INTRODUCTION: Using the National Cancer Database, we assessed the relationship between facility overall esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) case volume and survival. METHODS: We categorized facilities into volume quintiles based on annual EAC patient volume and performed a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression between facility patient volume and survival. RESULTS: In a cohort of 116,675 patients, facilities with higher vs lower (≥25 vs 1–4 cases) annual EAC patient volume demonstrated improved survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.80. 95% confidence interval: 0.70–0.91). DISCUSSION: This robust volume-outcome effect calls for centralization of care for EAC patients at high annual case volume facilities.