Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Endoskopie – was haben wir zuletzt an klinisch Relevantem dazu gelernt?

Endoscopy—What Have We Recently Learned Regarding Clinical Relevance?

  • Originalien
  • Published:
Journal für Gastroenterologische und Hepatologische Erkrankungen Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Künstliche Intelligenz zieht, so wie in der gesamten Medizin, auch in die Endoskopie ein und wird in der Zukunft eine wertvolle Ergänzung darstellen. Die Polypektomie mit der kalten Schlinge ist sicher und auch kosteneffizient. Die „Zangenpolypektomie“ hat keinen Stellenwert mehr und gehört endgültig der Vergangenheit an. Für große Läsionen bietet sich die Unterwassermukosektomie an. Große Fortschritte hat die therapeutische Endosonographie gemacht. Mit der Verwendung von „lumen apposing metall stents“ (LAMS) sind die innere Gallenblasendrainage beim inoperablen Patienten oder die endoskopische Gastroenterostomien in der Palliation von Magenausgangsstenosen heute minimal-invasiv endoskopisch möglich. In diesen und vielen anderen Bereichen hat die gastrointestinale Endoskopie in den letzten Jahren eine rasante Entwicklung erlebt. Dies ist eine subjektive Auswahl des Leiters der Arbeitsgruppe Endoskopie der Österreichische Gesellschaft für Gastroenterologie und Hepatologie (ÖGGH) von wesentlichen Publikationen aus den vergangenen 2 Jahren aus dem Gebiet der Endoskopie.

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is moving into the field of endoscopy, as in all areas of medicine, and will be a valuable addition in the future. Cold snare polypectomy is safe and also cost efficient. “Forceps polypectomy” is no longer used and is considered an outdated procedure. For larger lesions, underwater mucosal resection is an option. Great progress has been made in therapeutic endosonography. With the use of lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS), internal gallbladder drainage in inoperable patients or endoscopic gastroenterostomies in the palliation of gastric outlet stenosis are now possible in a minimally invasive endoscopic manner. In these and many other areas, gastrointestinal endoscopy has undergone rapid advancement in recent years. In this article, significant publications from the past 2 years in the field of endoscopy have been subjectively selected by the head of the Endoscopy Working Group of the Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (ÖGGH).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  1. Repici A et al (2020) Efficacy of real-time computer-aided detection of colorectal neoplasia in a randomized trial. Gastroenterology 159(2):512–520.e7. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2020.04.062

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hashimoto R et al (2020) Artificial intelligence using convolutional neural networks for real-time detection of early esophageal neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 91(6):1264–1271.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2019.12.049

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Saito H et al (2020) Automatic detection and classification of protruding lesions in wireless capsule endoscopy images based on a deep convolutional neural network. Gastrointest Endosc 92(1):144–151.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.01.054

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. de Benito Sanz M et al (2022) Efficacy and safety of cold versus hot snare polypectomy for small (5–9 mm) colorectal polyps: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 54(1):35–44. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1327-8357

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mehta D et al (2022) Cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection for large sessile colon polyps: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Endoscopy 54(4):367–375. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1469-2644

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chandan S et al (2021) Efficacy and histologic accuracy of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for large (〉20 mm) colorectal polyps: a comparative review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 94(3):471–482.e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.12.034

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lau JYW et al (2020) Timing of endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. N Engl J Med 382(14):1299–1308. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1912484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schepers NJ et al (2020) Urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment in predicted severe acute gallstone pancreatitis (APEC): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 396(10245):167–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30539-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Werner YB et al (2019) Endoscopic or surgical myotomy in patients with idiopathic achalasia. N Engl J Med 381(23):2219–2229. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1905380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shah ED et al (2019) Valuing innovative endoscopic techniques: per-oral endoscopic myotomy for the management of achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc 89(2):264–273.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.04.2341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Khashab MA et al (2020) Peroral endoscopic myotomy: anterior versus posterior approach: a randomized single-blinded clinical trial. Gastrointest Endosc 91(2):288–297.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2019.07.034

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ichkhanian Y et al (2021) Outcomes of anterior versus posterior peroral endoscopic myotomy 2 years post-procedure: prospective follow-up results from a randomized clinical trial. Endoscopy 53(5):462–468. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1204-4242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mohan BP et al (2020) Anterior versus posterior approach in peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 52(4):251–258. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1090-0788

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gao DJ et al (2021) Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation plus plastic stent placement versus stent placement alone for unresectable extrahepatic biliary cancer: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 94(1):91–100.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.12.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Qumseya BJ et al (2021) ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the management of malignant hilar obstruction. Gastrointest Endosc 94(2):222–234.e22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.12.035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kandel P et al (2021) Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy versus fine-needle aspiration for genomic profiling and DNA yield in pancreatic cancer: a randomized crossover trial. Endoscopy 53(4):376–382. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1223-2171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Colán-Hernández J et al (2020) Antibiotic prophylaxis is not required for endoscopic ultrasonography-guided Fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic cystic lesions, based on a randomized trial. Gastroenterology 158(6):1642–1649.e1. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2020.01.025

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Teoh AYB et al (2020) Endosonography-guided gallbladder drainage versus percutaneous cholecystostomy in very high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis: an international randomised multicentre controlled superiority trial (DRAC 1). Gut 69(6):1085–1091. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2019-319996

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Oblizajek N et al (2020) Outcomes of early endoscopic intervention for pancreatic necrotic collections: a matched case-control study. Gastrointest Endosc 91(6):1303–1309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.01.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chavan R et al (2022) Impact of transmural plastic stent on recurrence of pancreatic fluid collection after metal stent removal in disconnected pancreatic duct: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 54(9):861–868. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1747-3283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Abbas A et al (2022) Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy versus surgical gastrojejunostomy for the palliation of gastric outlet obstruction in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Endoscopy 54(7):671–679. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1708-0037

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jung DH et al (2022) Endoscopic vacuum therapy for the management of upper GI leaks and perforations: a multicenter retrospective study of factors associated with treatment failure (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 95(2):281–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2021.09.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Markwell SA et al (2021) Individualized ergonomic wellness approach for the practicing gastroenterologist (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 94(2):248–259.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2021.01.045

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Endoskopie Zentrum, Med Campus III., Kepler Universitätsklinikum GmbH, Krankenhausstr. 9, 4021, Linz, Österreich

    Alexander Ziachehabi

Authors
  1. Alexander Ziachehabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander Ziachehabi.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

A. Ziachehabi gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden vom Autor keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

Hinweis des Verlags

Der Verlag bleibt in Hinblick auf geografische Zuordnungen und Gebietsbezeichnungen in veröffentlichten Karten und Institutsadressen neutral.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ziachehabi, A. Endoskopie – was haben wir zuletzt an klinisch Relevantem dazu gelernt?. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. Erkr. 21, 16–20 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41971-023-00145-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41971-023-00145-4

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation