Citations

Abstract Introduction Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (uEMR) technique has gained popularity for removal of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) due to high en-bloc resection rates and lower recurrence rates. However, there is no information regarding outcomes of uEMR for giant colorectal polyps. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of uEMR for giant colorectal polyps across multiple centers in North America. Methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of adults with giant colorectal polyps undergoing uEMR between January 2019 and November 2025. Giant colorectal polyps were defined as LNPCPs ≥40 mm. Primary outcomes were technical success and rate of recurrent adenoma. Secondary outcomes were severe adverse events (SAEs) and predictors of technical success, recurrence, and SAEs. Results A total of 137 polyps, with mean polyp size 47.6 mm were included. Majority of the lesions were located in right colon (61%, n = 83) with the most common histopathology being high-grade dysplasia (HGD) (31.4%, n = 43). Technical success was achieved in 90.5% (n = 124) with en-bloc resection rate of 11.7% (n = 16). Polyp fibrosis (OR: 0.08) and HGD (OR: 0.15) were independent predictors of inability to achieve technical success. Of 92 (67.1%) patients with follow-up, recurrent polyp was present in 8.7% (n = 8). SAEs were noted in 9.5%, consisting of delayed bleeding (9.5%, n = 13), while no delayed perforation or post polypectomy syndrome was noted. Discussion Our study demonstrates that uEMR is technically feasible for the removal of giant colorectal polyps with an acceptable safety profile and recurrence rate.

INTRODUCTION: The American College of Gastroenterology assembled a multidisciplinary task force to evaluate the current state and future direction of artificial intelligence (AI) in gastroenterology, hepatology, and endoscopy leading to the development of consensus-based recommendations for responsible AI integration in clinical practice. METHODS: A total of 32 subject-matter experts and 12 industry partners, representing diverse practice settings and expertise, conducted subgroup literature reviews across 5 key areas (endoscopy, practice management clinical applications, training and education, inflammatory bowel disease and liver disease, ethics and equity). Draft statements were developed and rated on a 5-point Likert scale using a modified Delphi process. A consensus was set at ≥70% combined agreement. Nonconsensus items were revised and revoted electronically. RESULTS: A total of 43 statements, 40 (93%) reached consensus in round 1 and the remaining 3 achieved consensus after round 2. Evidence supports computer-aided detection improving adenoma detection rate and miss rate in controlled studies, with mixed real-world impact and insufficient long-term outcomes (e.g., interval colon cancer rate). Recommendations emphasize thorough validation and reduction of bias by heterogeneous Data sets. Outside endoscopy, ambient AI scribes, natural language processing (NLP)-enabled coding, workflow optimization, and previous authorization support show potential. Training recommendations endorse a structured AI curriculum while preserving independent procedural competence to avoid deskilling. In inflammatory bowel disease and hepatology, AI could help improve diagnostic accuracy, help predict risk of disease progression, and help guide therapy. Equity, governance, and reimbursement statements call for chain-of-custody data protections, specialty-society oversight, and payment models that reward quality and cost reduction. DISCUSSION: This consensus outlines how AI can augment rather than replace clinical expertise while promoting safety, transparency, interoperability, and equity. Priorities include pragmatic and prospective trials, multi-institutional data-sharing consortia, bias mitigation, and workforce training to enable trustworthy and clinically impactful AI adoption in gastroenterology, liver, and endoscopy care.

Abstract Despite advances in endoscopic techniques, many colorectal surgeries in the United States are still performed for non-malignant colorectal polyps (NMCRPs). This study evaluated trends, demographic variations, and outcomes of surgeries for NMCRPs among all colorectal surgeries over the past decade. Using the TriNetX nationwide database, we identified adults (≥ 18 years of age) who underwent colectomy or proctectomy for NMCRPs or colorectal cancer between 2013 and 2023. We evaluated the proportion of surgeries performed for NMCRPs, stratified by demographic factors, and compared postoperative adverse events (AEs) between NMCRP and colorectal cancer surgeries. Among 136,721 surgeries, 52,480 (38.4%) were for NMCRPs. The proportion of NMCRP surgeries decreased from 59% in 2013 to 33% in 2023, with the most significant decline between 2013 and 2016. Black individuals showed the highest decrease. Compared with colorectal cancer surgeries, NMCRP surgeries were associated with significantly lower risks of wound, infectious, urinary, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, and cardiac AEs. Although the proportion of NMCRP surgeries has declined, ongoing efforts in education and training are needed to further reduce unnecessary surgeries and improve patient outcomes.

ABSTRACT Introduction Patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) and concomitant inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the risk of CRC in patients with PSC without IBD remains uncertain. We aimed to evaluate the risk of CRC in patients with PSC without a history of IBD using a large national database. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX database to identify patients ≥ 18 years with PSC. Patients were then divided into two groups, PSC with IBD (PSC‐IBD cohort) and PSC without IBD (PSC non‐IBD cohort), and were matched with patients without a history of PSC or IBD (non‐PSC/non‐IBD group) by using 1:1 propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the risk of first diagnosis of CRC. With censoring applied, Kaplan–Meier analysis with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs was used to compare time‐to‐event rates at daily time intervals. Results PSC patients without IBD were at increased risk of CRC compared to the non‐PSC/IBD cohort (aHR = 2.91; 95% CI: 1.6–6.0). Patients with PSC and IBD exhibited a higher risk of CRC (aHR = 6.5; 95% CI: 3.78–11.2), especially among the UC cohort (aHR = 6.3; 95% CI: 3.2–12.4). Patients with PSC were at increased risk of various gastrointestinal malignancies (aHR = 10.5; 95% CI: 7.3–15; p < 0.0001), including hepatobiliary cancers, pancreatic cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Discussion Our findings provide real‐world evidence that PSC is an independent risk factor for colorectal cancer, even in the absence of concomitant IBD. These results support the need for further research to determine whether patients with isolated PSC may benefit from tailored CRC surveillance strategies.

Abstract Background: Placebo response is crucial in interpreting treatment efficacy in ulcerative colitis (UC) trials. While it has been broadly studied, it remains underexplored in trials involving the growing number of biologics and small molecules for ulcerative colitis. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to November 13, 2024. Eligible studies were induction-phase RCTs, including adult patients with moderate-to-severe UC who received a biologic and a small-molecule against a placebo. Primary outcomes were pooled clinical and endoscopic response and remission rates. Safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and withdrawal rates. Random-effect models were used for meta-analysis. Meta-regression identified predictors of placebo outcomes. Results: 26 induction RCTs with 3,937 placebo-treated patients were included. IL inhibitor trials had the highest placebo clinical response (36%) and endoscopic remission (21%), while JAK inhibitors had the lowest (21% and 2%). Overall placebo rates were 34% for clinical response, 8% for clinical remission, 19% for endoscopic response, and 11% for endoscopic remission. Adverse events occurred in 54%, SAEs in 8%, and withdrawals in 18%. Younger age and longer follow-up were linked to higher placebo responses; recent trials showed reduced endoscopic effects. Conclusion: These findings highlight the need to account for placebo variability in trial design and interpretation, particularly as biologic and small-molecule therapies continue to expand in UC treatment.

Abstract Background and Objectives Gastric varices (GVs) are associated with a higher risk of uncontrolled bleeding and death when compared with esophageal varices. While endoscopic glue injection therapy has been traditionally used for secondary prophylaxis in GV, data regarding primary prophylaxis continue to emerge. Recently, EUS–guided therapies have been used in GV bleeding. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search of several major databases from inception to June 2022. Our primary goals were to estimate the pooled rates of treatment efficacy, GV obliteration, GV recurrence, and rebleeding with EUS-guided therapy in primary and secondary prophylaxis. Overall adverse events and technical failures were assessed. Random-effects model was used for our meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 % statistics. Results Eighteen studies with 604 patients were included. In primary prophylaxis, pooled rate of GV obliteration was 90.2% (confidence interval [CI], 81.1–95.2; I 2 = 0). With combination EUS–glue and coil therapy, the rate was 95.4% (CI, 86.7%–98.5%; I 2 = 0). Pooled rate of posttherapy GV bleeding was 4.9% (CI, 1.8%–12.4%; I 2 = 0). In secondary prophylaxis, pooled rate of treatment efficacy was 91.9% (CI, 86.8%–95.2%; I 2 = 12). With EUS-glue, EUS-coil, and combination EUS–glue and coil, the rates were 94.3% (CI, 88.9%–97.1%; I 2 = 0), 95.5% (CI, 80.3%–99.1%; I 2 = 0), and 88.7% (CI, 76%–95.1%; I 2 = 14), respectively. Pooled rate of GV obliteration was 83.6% (CI, 71.5%–91.2%; I 2 = 74). With EUS-glue, EUS-coil, and combination EUS–glue and coil, the rates were 84.6% (CI, 75.9%–90.6%; I 2 = 31), 92.3% (CI, 81.1%–97.1%; I 2 = 0), and 84.5% (CI, 50.8%–96.7%; I 2 = 75), respectively. Pooled rates of GV rebleeding and recurrence were 18.1% (CI, 13.1%–24.3%; I 2 = 16) and 20.6% (CI, 9.3%–39.5%; I 2 = 66), respectively. Conclusion Our analysis shows that EUS-guided therapy for GVs is technically feasible and clinically successful in both primary and secondary prophylaxis of GV.