Comprehensive approach to esophageal variceal bleeding:From prevention to treatment

Esophageal variceal bleeding is a severe complication often associated with portal hypertension,commonly due to liver cirrhosis.Prevention and treatment of this condition are critical for patient outcomes.Preventive strategies focus on reducing portal hypertension to prevent varices from developing or enlarging.Primary prophylaxis involves the use of non-selective beta-blockers,such as propranolol or nadolol,which lower portal pressure by decreasing cardiac output and thereby reducing blood flow to the varices.Endoscopic variceal ligation(EVL)may also be employed as primary prophylaxis to prevent initial bleeding episodes.Once bleeding occurs,immediate treatment is essential.Initial management includes hemodynamic stabilization followed by pharmacological therapy with vasoactive drugs such as octreotide or terlipressin to control bleeding.Endoscopic intervention is the cornerstone of treatment,with techniques such as EVL or sclerotherapy applied to directly manage the bleeding varices.In cases where bleeding is refractory to endoscopic treatment,transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt may be considered to effectively reduce portal pressure.Long-term management after an acute bleeding episode involves secondary prophylaxis using betablockers and repeated EVL sessions to prevent rebleeding,complemented by monitoring and managing liver function to address the underlying disease.In light of new scientific evidence,including the findings of the study by Peng et al,this editorial aims to review available strategies for the prevention and treatment of esophageal varices.

Impact of glucagon-like peptide receptor agonists on endoscopy and its preoperative management: Guidelines, challenges, and future directions

Glucagon-like peptide receptor agonists(GLP-1RA)are used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus and,more recently,have garnered attention for their effect-iveness in promoting weight loss.They have been associated with several gastrointestinal adverse effects,including nausea and vomiting.These side effects are presumed to be due to increased residual gastric contents.Given the potential risk of aspiration and based on limited data,the American Society of Anesthesi-ologists updated the guidelines concerning the preoperative management of patients on GLP-1RA in 2023.They included the duration of mandated cessation of GLP-1RA before sedation and usage of“full stomach”precautions if these medications were not appropriately held before the procedure.This has led to additional challenges,such as extended waiting time,higher costs,and increased risk for patients.In this editorial,we review the current societal guidelines,clinical practice,and future directions regarding the usage of GLP-1RA in patients undergoing an endoscopic procedure.

Adverse events associated with the gold probe and the injection gold probe devices used for endoscopic hemostasis:A MAUDE database analysis

BACKGROUND Gastrointestinal(GI)bleeding accounts for over half a million admissions annually and is the most common GI diagnosis requiring hospitalization in the United States.Bipolar electrocoagulation devices are used for the management of gastrointestinal bleeding.There is no data on device-related adverse events for gold probe(GP)and injection gold probe(IGP).AIM To analyze this using the Food and Drug Administration(FDA’s)Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience(MAUDE)database from 2013 to 2023.METHODS We examined post-marketing surveillance data on GP and IGP from the FDA MAUDE database to report devicerelated and patient-related adverse events between 2013-2023.The MAUDE database is a publicly available resource providing over 4 million records relating to medical device safety.Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics V.27.0(IBM Corp.,Armonk,NY,United States).RESULTS Our search elicited 140 reports for GP and 202 reports for IGP,respec-tively,during the study period from January 2013 to August 2023.Malfunctions reportedly occurred in 130 cases for GP,and actual patient injury or event occurred in 10 patients.A total of 149 patients(74%)reported with Injection GP events suffered no significant consequences due to the device failure,but 53 patients(26%)were affected by an event.CONCLUSION GP and IGP are critical in managing gastrointestinal bleeding.This study of the FDA MAUDE database revealed the type,number,and trends of reported device-related adverse events.The endoscopist and support staff must be aware of these device-related events and be equipped to manage them if they occur.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related early perforations:A study of effects of procedure duration,complexity,and endoscopist experience

BACKGROUND Perforations(Perf)during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP)are rare(<1%)but potentially fatal events(up to 20%mortality).Given its rarity,most data is through case series studies from centers or analysis of large databases.Although a meta-analysis has shown fewer adverse events as a composite(bleeding,pancreatitis,Perf)during ERCP performed at high-volume centers,there is very little real-world data on endoscopist and center procedural volumes,ERCP duration and complexity on the occurrence of Perf.AIM To study the profile of Perf related to ERCP by center and endoscopist procedure volume,ERCP time,and complexity from a national endoscopic repository.Patients from clinical outcomes research initiative-national endoscopic database(2000-2012)who underwent ERCP were stratified based on the endoscopist and center volume(quartiles),and total procedure duration and complexity grade of the ERCP based on procedure details.The effects of these variables on the Perf that occurred were studied.Continuous variables were compared between Perf and no perforations(NoPerf)using the Mann-Whitney U test as the data demonstrated significant skewness and kurtosis.RESULTS A total of 14153 ERCPs were performed by 258 endoscopists,with 20 reported Perf(0.14%)among 16 endoscopists.Mean patient age in years 61.6±14.8 vs 58.1±18.8(Perf vs.NoPerf,P=NS).The cannulation rate was 100%and 91.5%for Perf and NoPerf groups,respectively.13/20(65%)of endoscopists were high-volume performers in the 4th quartile,and 11/20(55%)of Perf occurred in centers with the highest volumes(4th quartile).Total procedure duration in minutes was 60.1±29.9 vs 40.33±23.5(Perf vs NoPerf,P<0.001).Fluoroscopy duration in minutes was 3.3±2.3 vs 3.3±2.6(Perf vs NoPerf P=NS).50%of the procedures were complex and greater than grade 1 difficulty.3/20(15%)patients had prior biliary surgery.13/20(65%)had sphincterotomies performed with stent insertion.Peritonitis occurred in only 1/20(0.5%).CONCLUSION Overall adverse events as a composite during ERCP are known to occur at a lower rate with higher volume endoscopists and centers.However,Perf studied from the national database show prolonged and more complex procedures performed by high-volume endoscopists at high-volume centers contribute to Perf.