Background and aims The prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in COVID-19 remain uncertain. We aimed to assess the prevalence, spectrum, severity, and significance of digestive manifestations in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods Consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were manually abstracted from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19. Findings A total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least one gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were elevated to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.76-1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 0.80-2.12) were not independently associated with mechanical ventilation or death. Conclusion Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course.

Background. The value of endoscopy in dyspeptic patients is questionable. Aims. To examine the prevalence of significant endoscopic findings (SEFs) and the utility of alarm features and age in predicting SEFs in outpatients with dyspepsia. Methods. A retrospective analysis of outpatient adults who had endoscopy for dyspepsia. Demographic variables, alarm features, and endoscopic findings were recorded. We defined SEFs as peptic ulcer disease, erosive esophagitis, malignancy, stricture, or findings requiring specific therapy. Results. Of 650 patients included in the analysis, 51% had a normal endoscopy. The most common endoscopic abnormality was nonerosive gastritis (29.7%) followed by nonerosive duodenitis (7.2%) and LA-class A esophagitis (5.4%). Only 10.2% had a SEF. Five patients (0.8%) had malignancy. SEFs were more likely present in patients with alarm features (12.6% versus 5.4%, p = 0.004). Age ≥ 55 and presence of any alarm feature were associated with SEFs (aOR 1.8 and 2.3, resp.). Conclusion. Dyspeptic patients have low prevalence of SEF. The presence of any alarm feature and age ≥ 55 are associated with higher risk of SEF. Endoscopy in young patients with no alarm features has a low yield; these patients can be considered for nonendoscopic approach for diagnosis and management.

Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) had its origins in numerous small animal studies primarily examining safety and feasibility. In human trials, safety and feasibility remain at the forefront; however, additional logistic, practical, and regulatory requirements must be addressed. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate and summarize published studies to date of NOTES in humans. The literature review was performed using PUBMED and MEDLINE databases. Articles published in human populations between 2007 and 2011 were evaluated. A review of this time period resulted in 48 studies describing procedures in 916 patients. Transcolonic and transvesicular procedures were excluded. The most common procedure was cholecystectomy (682, 75%). The most common approach was transvaginal (721, 79%). 424 procedures (46%) were pure NOTES and 491 (54%) were hybrid NOTES cases. 127 (14%) were performed in the United States of America and 789 (86%) were performed internationally. Since 2007, there has been major development in NOTES in human populations. A preponderance of published NOTES procedures were performed internationally. With further development, NOTES may make less invasive surgery available to a larger human population.

Background: The prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in COVID-19 remain uncertain. Methods: Consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were manually abstracted from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19. Results: A total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least one gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were elevated to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.76-1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 0.80-2.12) were not independently associated with mechanical ventilation or death. Conclusions: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course.

Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) is a major motility disorder based on the Chicago Classification of esophageal motility disorders. This entity involves a heterogenous group of underlying etiologies. The diagnosis is reached by performing high-resolution manometry. This reveals evidence of obstruction at the esophagogastric junction, manifested by an elevated integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) above a cutoff value (IRP threshold varies by the manometric technology and catheter used), with preserved peristalsis. Further tests like endoscopy, timed barium esophagram, and cross-sectional imaging can help further elucidate the underlying etiology and rule out mechanical causes. Treatment is tailored to the underlying cause. Similar to achalasia, treatment targeting lower esophageal sphincter disruption like pneumatic dilation, peroral endoscopic myotomy, and botulinum injection are used in patients with functional EGJOO and persistent symptoms.

AIMTo assess the effect of early vs late endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) on mortality and readmissions in acute cholangitis, using a nationally representative sample.METHODSWe used the 2014 National Readmissions Database to identify adult patients hospitalized with acute cholangitis who underwent therapeutic ERCP within one week of admission. Early ERCP was defined as ERCP performed on the same day of admission or the next day (days 0 or 1, < 48 h), and late ERCP was performed on days 2 to 7 of admission. Patients with severe cholangitis had any of the following additional diagnoses: Severe sepsis, septic shock, acute renal failure, acute respiratory failure, or thrombocytopenia. Multivariate logistic regression was used to calculate the adjusted odds of association of ERCP timing with in-hospital mortality, 30-d mortality, and 30-d readmissions, controlling for age, sex, severe disease and comorbidities.RESULTSFour thousand five hundred and seventy patients satisfied the inclusion criteria; with a mean age of 64.1 years. Of these, 66.6% had early ERCP, while 33.4% had late ERCP. Early ERCP was associated with lower in-hospital mortality [1.2% vs 2.4%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.50, 95%CI: 0.76-0.83, P = 0.001] and lower 30-d mortality (1.5% vs 3.3%, aOR = 0.48, 95%CI: 0.33-0.69, P < 0.0001) compared to the late ERCP group. Similarly, early ERCP was associated with lower 30-d readmissions (9.7% vs 15.1%, aOR = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.49-0.7, P < 0.0001). When stratified by severity of cholangitis, there was a similar benefit of early ERCP on all outcomes in those with and without severe cholangitis. The mean length of stay was higher in the late ERCP group compared to the early ERCP group (6.9 d vs 4.5 d, P < 0.0001). The mean hospitalization cost was higher in the late ERCP group ($21459 vs $16939, P < 0.0001).CONCLUSIONEarly ERCP is associated with lower in-hospital and 30-d mortality in those with or without severe cholangitis. Regardless of severity, we suggest performing early ERCP.

AIMTo investigate whether adenoma and polyp detection rates (ADR and PDR, respectively) in screening colonoscopies performed in the presence of fellows differ from those performed by attending physicians alone.METHODSWe performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent a screening colonoscopy at Grady Memorial Hospital between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2015. Patients with a history of colon polyps or cancer and those with poor colon preparation or failed cecal intubation were excluded from the analysis. Associations of fellowship training level with the ADR and PDR relative to attendings alone were assessed using unconditional multivariable logistic regression. Models were adjusted for sex, age, race, and colon preparation quality.RESULTSA total of 7503 colonoscopies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The mean age of the study patients was 58.2 years; 63.1% were women and 88.2% were African American. The ADR was higher in the fellow participation group overall compared to that in the attending group: 34.5% vs 30.7% (P = 0.001), and for third year fellows it was 35.4% vs 30.7% (aOR = 1.23, 95%CI: 1.09-1.39). The higher ADR in the fellow participation group was evident for both the right and left side of the colon. For the PDR the corresponding figures were 44.5% vs 40.1% (P = 0.0003) and 45.7% vs 40.1% (aOR = 1.25, 95%CI: 1.12-1.41). The ADR and PDR increased with increasing fellow training level (P for trend < 0.05).CONCLUSIONThere is a stepwise increase in ADR and PDR across the years of gastroenterology training. Fellow participation is associated with higher adenoma and polyp detection.

No abstract