Virtual reality tools for training in gastrointestinal endoscopy:A systematic review

BACKGROUND Virtual reality(VR)has emerged as an innovative technology in endoscopy training,providing a simulated environment that closely resembles real-life scenarios and offering trainees a valuable platform to acquire and enhance their endoscopic skills.This systematic review will critically evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of VR-based training compared to traditional methods.AIM To evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of VR-based training compared to traditional methods.By examining the current state of the field,this review seeks to identify gaps,challenges,and opportunities for further research and implementation of VR in endoscopic training.METHODS The study is a systematic review,following the guidelines for reporting systematic reviews set out by the PRISMA statement.A comprehensive search command was designed and implemented and run in September 2023 to identify relevant studies available,from electronic databases such as PubMed,Scopus,Cochrane,and Google Scholar.The results were systematically reviewed.RESULTS Sixteen articles were included in the final analysis.The total number of participants was 523.Five studies focused on both upper endoscopy and colonoscopy training,two on upper endoscopy training only,eight on colonoscopy training only,and one on sigmoidoscopy training only.Gastrointestinal Mentor virtual endoscopy simulator was commonly used.Fifteen reported positive results,indicating that VR-based training was feasible and acceptable for endoscopy learners.VR technology helped the trainees enhance their skills in manipulating the endoscope,reducing the procedure time or increasing the technical accuracy,in VR scenarios and real patients.Some studies show that the patient discomfort level decreased significantly.However,some studies show there were no significant differences in patient discomfort and pain scores between VR group and other groups.CONCLUSION VR training is effective for endoscopy training.There are several well-designed randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes,proving the potential of this innovative tool.Thus,VR should be more widely adopted in endoscopy training.Furthermore,combining VR training with conventional methods could be a promising approach that should be implemented in training.

Indications and Results of Lower Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in a Regional Hospital Center in Senegal

Introduction: Gastrointestinal endoscopy plays a crucial role in the management of gastrointestinal diseases. The aim of this study was to report the indications and results of lower digestive endoscopy in a hospital center in Senegal. Patients and Methods: We conducted a descriptive retrospective study from September 1st, 2017, to September 30, 2018 at the gastrointestinal endoscopy unit of the regional hospital center of Thiès. All patients received for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy and whose reports were usable, were included. In the reports, we collected and analyzed sociodemographic data, indication and results of the endoscopic examination. Results: We included 250 patients. There were 140 men (sex ratio 1.27). The average age was 42 years [range 1 - 92 years]. There were 37 colonoscopies (14.8%), 51 rectosigmoidoscopies (20.4%) and 162 anorectoscopies (64.8%). The patients were from the region of Thiès in 82% of cases. In most cases, they were most often referred by general practitioners (22.8%) and surgeons (20.8%). The main indications were rectal bleeding (36.8%), hemorrhoidal disease (23.2%) and proctalgia (11.6%). Hemorrhoidal disease (63.6%), anal fistula (14%) and tumors (8.8%) were the most common pathologies. Conclusion: Admitted patients at the gastrointestinal endoscopy unit of the regional hospital center of Thiès have many indications as well as pathologies. Anal pathology is dominated by hemorrhoidal disease.

Indications and Findings of Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Elderly Patients in Parakou, Republic of Benin

Introduction: Elderly people are considered fragile and at greater risk of having malignant gastrointestinal tumors. The objective of this work was to report the reasons for performing gastrointestinal endoscopy and the lesions found during the endoscopy of this target population in Parakou. Patients and Study Methods: This was a descriptive and cross-sectional study with a retrospective collection of data from January 2016 to December 2017, then from January 2020 to December 2021. It took place in the Regional Teaching Hospital of Borgou-Alibori in Parakou and in the private gastrointestinal endoscopy center of Parakou (Northern Gastrointestinal Exploration Center). All patients aged at least 60 years who had undergone an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy during the study period were included. The variables studied were: the sex, age, indications for the examination, endoscopic lesions and data from the anatomo-pathological examination. Results: In total, out of 1540 upper gastrointestinal endoscopies performed during the study period, 249 (16.17%) involved patients aged 60 years and over. The sex ratio was 1.26. The main indication for the examination was epigastric pain (123 cases, i.e. 49.40%) followed by vomiting (53 cases, i.e. 21.29%). In terms of lesions, non-tumorous gastropathy came first in the stomach (206 cases, i.e. 82.73%) while esophageal lesions were dominated by esophageal candidiasis and cardial incompetence (39 cases, i.e. 15.66% in each of the two situations). In the duodenum, ulcer was noted in 30 patients (12.05%). In 38 patients, 12 (31.58%) were tested positive for Helicobacter pylori infection. Cancers of the gastrointestinal tract were confirmed in 11 patients (4.42%). Conclusion: Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy remains an excellent examination for the exploration of the upper gastrointestinal tract. In Parakou, epigastric pain represents the main indication for this examination in subjects over 60 years of age. Inflammatory or ulcerated non-tumorous gastropathy is the most commonly endoscopic lesion. Esophageal and gastric cancers are less common in this population group according to our study.

Sedation and analgesia in gastrointestinal endoscopy: What’s new?

Various types of sedation and analgesia technique have been used during gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures.The best methods for analgesia and sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy are still debated.Providing an adequate regimen of sedation/analgesia might be considered an art,influencing several aspects of endoscopic procedures: the quality of the examination,the patient’s cooperation and the patient’s and physician’s satisfaction with the sedation.The properties of a model sedative agent for endoscopy would include rapid onset and offset of action,analgesic and anxiolytic effects,ease of titration to desired level of sedation,rapid recovery and an excellent safety prof ile.Therefore there is an impulse for development of new approaches to endoscopic sedation.This article provides an update on the methods of sedation today available and future directions in endoscopic sedation.

Clinical course of subepithelial lesions detected on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

AIM:To evaluate the natural history of subepithelial lesions.METHODS:We reviewed the medical records of 104 159 patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy at the Center for Health Promotion of Samsung Medical Center between 1996 and 2003.Subepithelial lesions were detected in 795 patients(0.76%);252 patients were followed using upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for 82.5 ± 29.2 mo(range,12-160 mo;median,84 mo;1st quartile,60 mo;3rd quartile,105 mo).The median interval of follow-up endoscopy was 12 mo(range,6-105 mo;1st quartile,12 mo;3rd quartile,24 mo).RESULTS:The mean patient age was 53 years(range,22-80 years),and the male-to-female ratio was 2.36:1(177/75).The lesion size at initial measurement averaged 8.9 mm(range,2-25 mm;median,8 mm;1st quartile,5 mm;3rd quartile,10 mm).Of the 252 lesions,244(96.8%) were unchanged and 8(3.2%) were significantly increased in size(from 12.9 ± 6.0 to 21.2 ± 12.2 mm) after a mean interval of 59.1 ± 27.5 mo(range,12-86 mo).Surgical resection of lesions was performed when the lesions were ≥ 3 cm in diameter.Two lesions were diagnosed as gastrointestinal stromal tumors with an intermediate or high risk of malignancy and one lesion was classified as a schwannoma.CONCLUSION:Most small subepithelial lesions do not change as shown by endoscopic examination,and regular follow-up with endoscopy may be considered in small,subepithelial lesions,especially lesions < 1 cm in size.

Evolving role of artificial intelligence in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Artificial intelligence(AI)is a combination of different technologies that enable machines to sense,comprehend,and learn with human-like levels of intelligence.AI technology will eventually enhance human capability,provide machines genuine autonomy,and reduce errors,and increase productivity and efficiency.AI seems promising,and the field is full of invention,novel applications;however,the limitation of machine learning suggests a cautious optimism as the right strategy.AI is also becoming incorporated into medicine to improve patient care by speeding up processes and achieving greater accuracy for optimal patient care.AI using deep learning technology has been used to identify,differentiate catalog images in several medical fields including gastrointestinal endoscopy.The gastrointestinal endoscopy field involves endoscopic diagnoses and prognostication of various digestive diseases using image analysis with the help of various gastrointestinal endoscopic device systems.AI-based endoscopic systems can reliably detect and provide crucial information on gastrointestinal pathology based on their training and validation.These systems can make gastroenterology practice easier,faster,more reliable,and reduce inter-observer variability in the coming years.However,the thought that these systems will replace human decision making replace gastrointestinal endoscopists does not seem plausible in the near future.In this review,we discuss AI and associated various technological terminologies,evolving role in gastrointestinal endoscopy,and future possibilities.

Unsedated versus Sedated Gastrointestinal Endoscopy:A Questionnaire Investigation in Wuhan,Central China

National data show that in China mainland unsedated gastrointestinal （GI） endoscopy has been applied in most hospitals for clinical examination, while sedated GI endoscopy is only performed in some hospitals. The purpose of this study was to compare sedated versus unsedated GI endoscopy regarding cost, safety, degree of comfort, tolerance level and overall satisfaction of patients over a 6-month period investigation. From March to September 2011, a questionnaire survey was performed on 1800 patients and 30 physicians at Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University and Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command. The patients fell into two groups according to their own de- cisions： the unsedated group （n=1000） and the sedated group （n=800）. After examination, the patients and the physicians were required to fill in a questionnaire form. All the data were analyzed statistically. The results showed that the main factors the patients took for consideration between sedated and unse- dated procedures included economy, comfort and safety. The income levels between the sedated and unsedated groups showed significant difference （P〈0.01）. Most patients in the unsedated group had lower income and were covered by less medical insurance. The tolerance rate was 92.4% vs. 65.5% be- tween the sedated and unsedated group, respectively. 95.5% patients in the sedated group and 72.1% pa- tients in the unsedated group chose the same endoscopy procedure for repeat examination. The survey data from endoscopists suggested the sedated procedure was more comfortable but less safe than the unsedated procedure （P〈0.01 ）. In China, unsedated GI endoscopy is now widely accepted by the major- ity of patients due to low cost and safety. Compared to unsedated GI endoscopy, sedated GI endoscopy is less painful, but more expensive and less safe. With the rapid improvement of people＇s living stan- dard and the reliability of sedation technology, we expect sedated GI endoscopy will be gradually ac- cepted by more patients.

Usefulness of duodenal biopsy during routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for diagnosis of celiac disease

AIM： To describe the trend in duodenal biopsy performance during routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in an adult Spanish population, and to analyze its value for the diagnosis of celiac disease in clinical practice. METHODS： A 15 year-trend （1990 to 2004） in duodenal biopsy performed when undertaking upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was studied. We analysed the prevalence of celiac disease in the overall group, and in the subgroups with anaemia and/or chronic diarrhoea. RESULTS： Duodenal biopsy was performed in 1033 of 13 678 upper gastrointestinal endoscopies （7.6%）; an increase in the use of such was observed over the study period （1.9% in 1990-1994, 5% in 1995-1999 and 12.8% in 2000-2004）. Celiac disease was diagnosed in 22 patients （2.2%）, this being more frequent in women than in men （3% and 1% respectively）. Fourteen out of 514 （2.7%） patients with anaemia, 12 out of 141 （8.5%） with chronic diarrhoea and 8 out of 42 （19%） with anaemia plus chronic diarrhoea had celiac disease. A classical clinical presentation was observed in 55% of the cases, 23% of the patients had associated dermatitis herpetiformis and 64% presented anaemia; 9% were diagnosed by familial screening and 5% by cryptogenetic hypertransaminasaemia. CONCLUSION： Duodenal biopsy undertaken during routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in adults, has been gradually incorporated into clinical practice, and is a useful tool for the diagnosis of celiac disease in high risk groups such as those with anaemia and/or chronic diarrhoea.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy in the pregnant woman

About 20000 gastrointestinal endoscopies are performed annually in America in pregnant women. Gastrointestinal endoscopy during pregnancy raises the critical issue of fetal safety in addition to patient safety. Endoscopic medications may be potentially abortifacient or teratogenic. Generally, Food and Drug Administration category B or C drugs should be used for endoscopy. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy(EGD) seems to be relatively safe for both mother and fetus based on two retrospective studies of 83 and 60 pregnant patients. The diagnostic yield is about 95% when EGD is performed for gastrointestinal bleeding. EGD indications during pregnancy include acute gastrointestinal bleeding, dysphagia > 1 wk, or endoscopic therapy. Therapeutic EGD is experimental due to scant data, but should be strongly considered for urgent indications such as active bleeding. One study of 48 sigmoidoscopies performed during pregnancy showed relatively favorable fetal outcomes, rare bad fetal outcomes, and bad outcomes linked to very sick mothers. Sigmoidoscopy should be strongly considered for strong indications,including significant acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding, chronic diarrhea, distal colonic stricture, suspected inflammatory bowel disease flare, and potential colonic malignancy. Data on colonoscopy during pregnancy are limited. One study of 20 pregnant patients showed rare poor fetal outcomes. Colonoscopy is generally experimental during pregnancy, but can be considered for strong indications: known colonic mass/stricture, active lower gastrointestinal bleeding, or colonoscopic therapy. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) entails fetal risks from fetal radiation exposure. ERCP risks to mother and fetus appear to be acceptable when performed for ERCP therapy, as demonstrated by analysis of nearly 350 cases during pregnancy. Justifiable indications include symptomatic or complicated choledocholithiasis, manifested by jaundice, cholangitis, gallstone pancreatitis, or dilated choledochus. ERCP should be performed by an expert endoscopist, with informed consent about fetal radiation risks, minimizing fetal radiation exposure, and using an attending anesthesiologist. Endoscopy is likely most safe during the second trimester of pregnancy.

Evaluating the accuracy of American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis with choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND Acute gallstone pancreatitis(AGP) is the most common cause of acute pancreatitis(AP) in the United States. Patients with AGP may also present with choledocholithiasis. In 2010, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy(ASGE) suggested a management algorithm based on probability for choledocholithiasis, recommending additional imaging for patients at intermediate risk and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) for patients at high risk of choledocholithiasis. In 2019, the ASGE guidelines were updated using more specific criteria to categorize individuals at high risk for choledocholithiasis. Neither ASGE guideline has been studied in AGP to determine the probability of having choledocholithiasis.AIM To determine compliance with ASGE guidelines, assess outcomes, and compare 2019 vs 2010 ASGE criteria for suspected choledocholithiasis in AGP.METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 882 patients admitted with AP to a single tertiary care center from 2008-2018. AP was diagnosed using revised Atlanta criteria and AGP was defined as the presence of gallstones on imaging or with cholestatic pattern of liver injury in the absence of another cause. Patients with chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic malignancy were excluded as were those who went directly to cholecystectomy prior to assessment for choledocholithiasis. Patients were assigned low, intermediate or high risk based on ASGE guidelines. Our primary outcomes of interest were the proportion of patients in the intermediate risk group undergoing magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography(MRCP) first and the proportion of patients in the high risk group undergoing ERCP directly without preceding imaging. Secondary outcomes of interest included outcome differences based on if guidelines were not adhered to. We then evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of 2019 in comparison to the 2010 ASGE criteria for patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. We performed the t test or Wilcoxon rank sum test, as appropriate, to analyze if there were outcome differences based on if guidelines were not adhered to. Kappa coefficients were calculated to measure the degree of agreement between pairs of variables.RESULTS In this cohort, we identified 235 patients with AGP of which 79 patients were excluded as they went directly to surgery for cholecystectomy without prior MRCP or ERCP. Of the remaining 156 patients, 79 patients were categorized as intermediate risk and 77 patients were high risk for choledocholithiasis according to the 2010 ASGE guidelines. Among 79 intermediate risk patients, 54(68%) underwent MRCP first whereas 25 patients(32%) went directly to ERCP. For the 54 patients with intermediate risk who had MRCP first, 36 patients had no choledocholithiasis while 18 patients had evidence of choledocholithiasis prompting ERCP. Of these patients, ERCP confirmed stone disease in 11 patients. Of the 25 intermediate risk patients who directly underwent ERCP, 18 patients had stone disease. One patient with a normal ERCP developed post ERCP pancreatitis. Patients undergoing MRCP in this group had a significantly longer length of stay(5.0 vs 4.0 d, P = 0.02). In the high risk group, 64 patients(83%) had ERCP without preceding imaging, of which, 53 patients had findings consistent with choledocholithiasis, of which 13 patients(17%) underwent MRCP before ERCP, all of which showed evidence of stone disease. Furthermore, all of these patients ultimately had an ERCP, of which 8 patients had evidence of stones and 5 had normal examination.RESULTS Our cohort also demonstrated that 58% of all 156 patients with AGP had confirmed choledocholithiasis(79% of the high risk group and 37% of the intermediate group when risk was assigned based on the 2010 ASGE guidelines). When the updated 2019 ASGE guidelines were applied instead of the original 2010 guidelines, there was moderate agreement between the 2010 and 2019 guidelines(kappa = 0.46, 95%CI: 0.34-0.58). Forty-two of 77 patients were still deemed to be high risk and 35 patients were downgraded to intermediate risk. Thirty-five patients who were originally assigned high risk were reclassified as intermediate risk. For these 35 patients, 26 patients had ERCP findings consistent with choledocholithiasis and 9 patients had a normal examination. Based on the 2019 criteria, 9/35 patients who were downgraded to intermediate risk had an unnecessary ERCP with normal findings(without a preceding MRCP).CONCLUSION Two-thirds in intermediate risk and 83% in high risk group followed ASGE guidelines for choledocholithiasis. One intermediate-group patient with normal ERCP had post-ERCP AP, highlighting the risk of unnecessary procedures.

Artificial intelligence application in diagnostic gastrointestinal endoscopy-Deus ex machina?

The close relationship of medicine with technology and the particular interest in this symbiosis in recent years has led to the development of several computed artificial intelligence(AI)systems aimed at various areas of medicine.A number of studies have demonstrated that those systems allow accurate diagnoses with histological precision,thus facilitating decision-making by clinicians in real time.In the field of gastroenterology,AI has been applied in the diagnosis of pathologies of the entire digestive tract and their attached glands,and are increasingly accepted for the detection of colorectal polyps and confirming their histological classification.Studies have shown high accuracy,sensitivity,and specificity in relation to expert endoscopists,and mainly in relation to those with less experience.Other applications that are increasingly studied and with very promising results are the investigation of dysplasia in patients with Barrett's esophagus and the endoscopic and histological assessment of colon inflammation in patients with ulcerative colitis.In some cases AI is thus better than or at least equal to human abilities.However,additional studies are needed to reinforce the existing data,and mainly to determine the applicability of this technology in other indications.This review summarizes the state of the art of AI in gastroenterological pathology.

Medical malpractice litigation related to gastrointestinal endoscopy in Japan:A two-decade review of civil court cases

AIM: To examine the allegations in malpractice litigations related to gastrointestinal endoscopy in Japan. METHODS: A retrospective review of cases tried in the civil court system during the 21-year period from 1985 to 2005, identified in a computerized legal database, was undertaken. RESULTS: Eighteen malpractice litigations and a total of 30 allegations were identified. Of the 18 (44%) malpractice litigations, 8 (44%) were related to eso- phagogastroduodenoscopy, 4 (22%) to colonoscopy, 4 (22%) to endoscopic sphincterotomy, and 2 (11%) to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Seventeen (94%) cases pertained to complications, and the remaining (6%) case pertained to misdiagnosis. In 10 cases, the patient died of the complications. Allegations were categorized as: (1) performance error during the endoscopic procedure (n = 12, 40%); (2) lack of informed consent (n = 9, 30%); (3) performance error during the treatment after the endoscopic procedure (n = 4, 13%); (4) premedication error (n = 3, 10%); (5) diagnostic error (n = 1, 3%); and (6) indication error for the endoscopic procedure (n = 1, 3%). CONCLUSION: These data may aid in the design of risk prevention strategies to be used by gastrointestinal endoscopists.

Safety of gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with acute coronary syndrome and concomitant gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND Gastrointestinal bleeding(GIB)is a major concern in patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndrome(ACS)due to the common use of both antiplatelet medications and anticoagulants.Studies evaluating the safety of gastrointestinal endoscopy(GIE)in ACS patients with GIB are limited by their relatively small size,and the focus has generally been on upper GIB and esophago-gastroduodenoscopy(EGD)only.AIM To evaluate the safety profile and the hospitalization outcomes of undergoing GIE in patients with ACS and concomitant GIB using the national database for hospitalized patients in the United States.METHODS The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was queried to identify patients hospitalized with ACS and GIB during the same admission between 2005 and 2014.The International Classification of Diseases Code,9th Revision Clinical Modification was utilized for patient identification.Patients were further classified into two groups based on undergoing endoscopic procedures(EGD,small intestinal endoscopy,colonoscopy,or flexible sigmoidoscopy).Both groups were compared regarding demographic information,outcomes,and comorbidities.Multivariate analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with mortality and prolonged length of stay.Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables,while Student’s t-test was used to compare continuous variables.All analyses were performed using SAS 9.4(Cary,NC,United States).RESULTS A total of 35612318 patients with ACS were identified between January 2005 and December 2014.269483(0.75%)of the patients diagnosed with ACS developed concomitant GIB during the same admission.At least one endoscopic procedure was performed in 68%of the patients admitted with both ACS and GIB.Patients who underwent GIE during the index hospitalization with ACS and GIB had lower mortality(3.8%)compared to the group not undergoing endoscopy(8.6%,P<0.001).A shorter length of stay(LOS)was observed in patients who underwent GIE(mean 6.59±7.81 d)compared to the group not undergoing endoscopy(mean 7.84±9.73 d,P<0.001).Multivariate analysis showed that performing GIE was associated with lower mortality(odds ratio:0.58,P<0.001)and shorter LOS(-0.36 factor,P<0.001).CONCLUSION Performing GIE during the index hospitalization of patients with ACS and GIB was correlated with a better mortality rate and a shorter LOS.Approximately twothirds of patients with both ACS and GIB undergo GIE during the same hospitalization.

Acute pancreatitis as a rare complication of gastrointestinal endoscopy:A case report

BACKGROUND Acute pancreatitis is an uncommon complication of gastrointestinal endoscopy,especially if the patient has none of the common risk factors associated with pancreatitis;such as alcoholism,gallstones,hypertriglyceridemia,hypercalcemia or the use of certain drugs.CASE SUMMARY A 56-year-old female patient developed abdominal pain immediately after the completion of an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.The pain was predominantly in the upper and middle abdomen and was persistent and severe.The patient was diagnosed with acute pancreatitis.Treatment included complete fasting,octreotide injection prepared in a prefilled syringe to inhibit pancreatic enzymes secretion,ulinastatin injection to inhibit pancreatic enzymes activity,esomeprazole for gastric acid suppression,fluid replacement and nutritional support.Over the next 3 d,the patient's symptoms improved.The patient remained hemodynamically stable throughout hospitalization and was discharged home in a clinically stable state.CONCLUSION Pancreatitis should be considered in the differential diagnosis of abdominal pain after upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy in cirrhotic patient:Issues on the table

Patients with liver cirrhosis are fragile and present specific clinical hallmarks.When undergoing to gastrointestinal(GI)endoscopy,these subjects require an individual pre evaluation,taking into account:Level of haemostasis impairment,the individual risk of infection,the impact of sedation on hepatic encephalopathy and other factors.The overall assessment of liver function,employing common scoring systems,should be also assessed in the preprocedural phase.Beside some common general problems,regarding GI endoscopy in cirrhotic subjects,also specific issues are present for some frequent indications or procedures.For instance,despite an increased incidence of adenomas in cirrhosis,colon cancer screening remains suboptimal in subjects with this disease.Several studies in fact demonstrated liver cirrhosis as a negative factor for an adequate colon cleansing before colonoscopy.On the other hand,also the routine assessment of gastroesophageal varices during upper GI endoscopy presents some concern,since important inter-observer variability or incomplete description of endoscopic findings has been reported in some studies.In this review we discussed in details the most relevant issues that may be considered while performing general GI endoscopic practice,in patient with cirrhosis.For most of these issues there are no guidelines or clear indications.Moreover until now,few studies focused on these aspects.We believe that targeting these issues with corrective measures may be helpful to develop a tailored endoscopic approach for cirrhosis,in the future.

Acknowledgments to reviewers of World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Many reviewers have contributed their expertise and time to the peer review, a critical process to ensure the quality of World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The editors and authors of the articles submitted to the journal are grateful to the following reviewers for evaluating the articles (including those published in this issue and those rejected for this issue) during the last editing time period. Philip Wai Yan Chiu, Associate Professor, Department of Sur-

Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and Children Digestive Pathology in Abidjan

The aim of our study is to determine the demographic data, indications, performance, and security of gastroscopy in children in Ivory Coast. Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective analytical study based on reports of upper digestive endoscopy per-formed in children (from 1 day to 15 years included) in 2 university hospitals in Abid-jan from March 2009 to March 2016. Results: 276 upper gastrointestinal endoscopies (UGIE) were performed in children during the study period. UGIE was performed with a diagnostic purpose in most cases (99%). The indications of UGIE were abdominal pains (38.95%), ingestion of caustic substances (29.82%), upper gastrointestinal bleeding (10.87%) and vomiting (10.17%). UGIE was normal in 39.49% of cases for all ages. The main anomalies observed in upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy for all ages were gastropathies (29%);caustic lesions (13.02%) and bile reflux (10.45%). Ul-cers were rarely found (2.54%). Histological examination of biopsies revealed chronic H. pylori gastritis in 67% of gastric samples examined. All endoscopic examinations were performed without incident. Conclusion: Gastroscopy is a harmless examination with a great diagnostic and therapeutic utility in digestive pathology of children in Ivory Coast.

Acceptance of American society for gastrointestinal endoscopy’s guidelines for endoscopy reports

Background: Several studies indicate that endoscopy reports lack uniform content and terminology. Thus ASGE, ESGE, and WEO have prepared guidelines to improve the quality of endoscopy reports. However, the acceptance of such recommendations in the community of endoscopists has not been assessed. Objective: The aim of the present study was to determine Non-US endoscopists’ agreement to current ASGE guidelines for endoscopy reporting and ESGE recommendations for image documentation. Design: 137 endoscopists were invited to participate in this internet survey, covering 34 items regarding the content of the endoscopy reports. Non-responders received three e-mail reminders before the study was closed. Settings: A web-based survey tool developed at the University of Oslo was used to perform this study (https://wo.uio.no/as/WebObjects/nettskjema.woa). Results: Eighty (60%) of the 137 endoscopists responded, to the survey. Their agreement to the various items of the ASGE guidelines for text content ranged from 21% - 100%. Only 8.9% (95% CI, 4.4% - 17.2%) considered it necessary to perform routine image documentation according to the ESGE guidelines. Limitations: The response rate of 68%, is on the lower limit of acceptable. Conclusions: The cohort of endoscopists agrees partially to the ASGE guidelines. However, they do not consider systematic image documentation

Blood thinners and gastrointestinal endoscopy

As the number of diagnostic and therapeutic gastrointestinal endoscopies is increasing, and there is an increase in number of patients taking blood thinners, we are seeing more and more patients on blood thinners prior to endoscopic procedures. Gastrointestinal bleeding or thromboembolism can occur in this category of patients in the periendoscopic period. To better manage these patients, endoscopists should have a clear concept about the various blood thinners in the market. Patients&rsquo; risk of thromboembolism off anticoagulation, and the risk of bleeding from endoscopic procedures should be assessed prior to endoscopy. The endoscopic procedure should be done when it is safe to do it.

Lack of proper reimbursement is hampering adoption of minimally invasive gastrointestinal endoscopy in North America

Endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD)and related procedures are minimally invasive and cost-effective alternates to surgery.However,there is no approved or listed current procedural terminology(CPT)for ESD.We aimed to review the current reimbursement process hurdles for ESD procedures in private practice model in United States.We reviewed the data of two advanced endoscopists(one in New York and other in Pennsylvania State)performing ESD in their private practice set-ups.We found the reimbursement process was complex,with number of refusals varied from 0-9 for ESD procedures.It was not paid at all in 8.3%of cases by the medical insurance.Endoscopic mucosal resection,which is considered inferior as compared to ESD,but has a listed CPT,was denied in only 0.83%cases.Our data highlights the billing hurdles by the endoscopists to adopt ESD-related procedures in private practice model.