Submit to Diagnostics Review for Diagnostics Propose a Special Issue

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser

Advances in Endoscopic Diagnosis and Tissue Resection Techniques

Print Special Issue Flyer
Special Issue Editors
Special Issue Information
Keywords
Published Papers

A special issue of Diagnostics (ISSN 2075-4418). This special issue belongs to the section "Optical Diagnostics".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 December 2023) | Viewed by 8085

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Faidon-Marios Laskaratos

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Digestive Diseases Centre, Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Dagenham RM7 0AG, UK
Interests: capsule endoscopy; small bowel endoscopy; colonoscopy; neuroendocrine tumors

Dr. Sergio Coda

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

1. Digestive Diseases Centre, Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Dagenham RM7 0AG, UK
2. Photonics Group, Department of Physics, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
Interests: colonoscopy; endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR); endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD); speedboat submucosal dissection (SSD); early GI cancers; AI (GI Genius); robotic colonoscopy; (endotics); bowel cancer screening; transnasal endoscopy (TNE); PuraStat

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Advances in endoscopy have significantly improved our ability to detect lesions in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and more accurately diagnose pathology. This may facilitate early recognition of mucosal abnormalities, improve lesion assessment, as well as guide resection. This Special Issue focuses on advances in endoscopic diagnosis, as well as developments in tissue resection strategies. Invited topics for this Special Issue may include:

Advanced endoscopic techniques, such as magnifying and image-enhanced endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy in the upper and lower GI tract;
Artificial intelligence and computer-aided diagnosis;
Advances in capsule endoscopy (CE) and/or the use of various types of CE for endoscopic diagnosis;
Advances in small bowel enteroscopy and/or the use of small bowel endoscopy in the diagnosis of small bowel lesions;
Other developments in upper and lower GI endoscopy, such as transnasal endoscopy and robotic colonoscopy;
Advances in tissue resection techniques in the upper and lower GI tract, including EMR (endoscopic mucosal resection), ESD (endoscopic submucosal dissection), hybrid techniques and FTRD (full thickness resection), endoscopic suturing for closure of defects, use of hemostatic agents for prevention of post-polypectomy bleeding, etc.

Dr. Faidon-Marios Laskaratos
Dr. Sergio Coda
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Diagnostics is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

advanced endoscopic imaging
artificial intelligence
gastroscopy
colonoscopy
capsule endoscopy
small bowel enteroscopy
EMR
ESD
SSD
robotic colonoscopy
PuraStat
TNE

Published Papers (5 papers)

Download All Papers

Research

Jump to: Review

12 pages, 855 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Emergency Endoscopic Interventions in Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Cohort Study

by Anna Mackiewicz-Pracka, Piotr Nehring and Adam Przybyłkowski

Diagnostics 2023, 13(23), 3584; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13233584 - 1 Dec 2023

Viewed by 997

Abstract

Introduction: Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common cause of emergency department admissions. The standard approach for the diagnosis and treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) involves an endoscopy of the upper gastrointestinal tract. While daytime emergency endoscopy has been well studied, there is limited evidence regarding its effectiveness during the nighttime. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a single center, analyzing adult patients with AUGIB referred for emergency endoscopy outside of regular hospital hours. Patients treated with endoscopic hemostatic methods were categorized into day-hours and night-hours groups based on the timing of the gastroscopy. The primary clinical endpoint was 120-day all-cause mortality, with secondary endpoints including hemostasis and recurrence. Results: In the population of 752 enrolled patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding symptoms, 592 had a gastroscopy during the day hours between 8.00 a.m. and 10.00 p.m., while 160 had procedures performed at night between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. In the day-hours group, the median time from symptom onset to endoscopy was 10 h (IQR 6–15), compared to 6 h (IQR 4–16) in the night-hours group. The gastroscopy duration (time to reach hemostasis during endoscopy) was significantly shorter during the night hours (p < 0.001). In both groups, endoscopic intervention after the sixth hour from symptom onset yielded improved outcomes, while treatment before the fifth hour resulted in poorer outcomes. Although the night-hours group had higher 120-day all-cause mortality, the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that emergency therapeutic gastroscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is similarly effective during both day and night hours, particularly when performed after the sixth hour from symptom onset. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Endoscopic Diagnosis and Tissue Resection Techniques)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1724 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy versus Fine-Needle Aspiration in the Diagnosis of Focal Liver Lesions: Prospective Head-to-Head Comparison

by Marcel Gheorghiu, Andrada Seicean, Sorana D. Bolboacă, Ioana Rusu, Radu Seicean, Cristina Pojoga, Ofelia Moșteanu and Zeno Sparchez

Diagnostics 2022, 12(9), 2214; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12092214 - 13 Sep 2022

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 2088

Abstract

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) from focal liver lesions are indicated in selected cases, but there has been no previous comparison of needle types of the same size. The aim of our study was to compare the histologic diagnostic accuracy and adequacy of cores obtained with EUS-FNB needles in contrast to those obtained with FNA needles in focal liver lesions. This prospective one-center study included patients with left lobe hepatic focal lesions with contraindications for percutaneous liver biopsy or need for EUS for concomitant lesions. Each patient had one pass of 22G EUS-FNB (Franseen) needle and one pass of 22G EUS-FNA in a crossover manner, without macroscopic on-site evaluation. Each sample was analyzed separately for histologic adequacy and diagnosis. The final diagnosis was based on histology results or on imaging follow-up in the case of negative biopsies. The EUS-FNB samples (n = 30) were found to be more adequate for histologic analysis, with more cellularity and longer tissue aggregates than the EUS-FNA samples (n = 30). The accuracy of EUS-FNB was 100%, whereas that of EUS-FNA was 86.7% (p = 0.039). No post-procedure complications were noted. The 22G EUS-FNB needle proved superior to 22G EUS-FNA in terms of tissue acquisition diagnostic accuracy and histologic adequacy in focal liver lesions. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Endoscopic Diagnosis and Tissue Resection Techniques)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

16 pages, 3172 KiB

Open AccessReview

Latest Advances in Endoscopic Detection of Oesophageal and Gastric Neoplasia

by William Waddingham, David G. Graham and Matthew R. Banks

Diagnostics 2024, 14(3), 301; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14030301 - 30 Jan 2024

Viewed by 1269

Abstract

Endoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of cancers and cancer precursors in the oesophagus and stomach. Early detection of upper GI cancers requires high-quality endoscopy and awareness of the subtle features these lesions carry. Endoscopists performing surveillance of high-risk patients including those with Barrett’s oesophagus, previous squamous neoplasia or chronic atrophic gastritis should be familiar with endoscopic features, classification systems and sampling techniques to maximise the detection of early cancer. In this article, we review the current approach to diagnosis of these conditions and the latest advanced imaging and diagnostic techniques. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Endoscopic Diagnosis and Tissue Resection Techniques)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 1928 KiB

Open AccessReview

Updates on the Management of Ampullary Neoplastic Lesions

by Roberta Maselli, Roberto de Sire, Alessandro Fugazza, Marco Spadaccini, Matteo Colombo, Antonio Capogreco, Torsten Beyna and Alessandro Repici

Diagnostics 2023, 13(19), 3138; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13193138 - 6 Oct 2023

Viewed by 1214

Abstract

Ampullary neoplastic lesions (ANLs) represent a rare cancer, accounting for about 0.6–0.8% of all gastrointestinal malignancies, and about 6–17% of periampullary tumors. They can be sporadic or occur in the setting of a hereditary predisposition syndrome, mainly familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Usually, noninvasive ANLs are asymptomatic and detected accidentally during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). When symptomatic, ANLs can manifest differently with jaundice, pain, pancreatitis, cholangitis, and melaena. Endoscopy with a side-viewing duodenoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) play a crucial role in the ANL evaluation, providing an accurate assessment of the size, location, and characteristics of the lesions, including the staging of the depth of tumor invasion into the surrounding tissues and the involvement of local lymph nodes. Endoscopic papillectomy (EP) has been recognized as an effective treatment for ANLs in selected patients, providing an alternative to traditional surgical methods. Originally, EP was recommended for benign lesions and patients unfit for surgery. However, advancements in endoscopic techniques have broadened its indications to comprise early ampullary carcinoma, giant laterally spreading lesions, and ANLs with intraductal extension. In this paper, we review the existing evidence on endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of ampullary neoplastic lesions. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Endoscopic Diagnosis and Tissue Resection Techniques)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 846 KiB

Open AccessReview

Robotic Colonoscopy and Beyond: Insights into Modern Lower Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

by Emanuele Tumino, Pierfrancesco Visaggi, Valeria Bolognesi, Linda Ceccarelli, Christian Lambiase, Sergio Coda, Purushothaman Premchand, Massimo Bellini, Nicola de Bortoli and Emanuele Marciano

Diagnostics 2023, 13(14), 2452; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13142452 - 23 Jul 2023

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1831

Abstract

Lower gastrointestinal endoscopy is considered the gold standard for the diagnosis and removal of colonic polyps. Delays in colonoscopy following a positive fecal immunochemical test increase the likelihood of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer (CRC) occurrence. However, patients may refuse to undergo conventional colonoscopy (CC) due to fear of possible risks and pain or discomfort. In this regard, patients undergoing CC frequently require sedation to better tolerate the procedure, increasing the risk of deep sedation or other complications related to sedation. Accordingly, the use of CC as a first-line screening strategy for CRC is hampered by patients’ reluctance due to its invasiveness and anxiety about possible discomfort. To overcome the limitations of CC and improve patients’ compliance, several studies have investigated the use of robotic colonoscopy (RC) both in experimental models and in vivo. Self-propelling robotic colonoscopes have proven to be promising thanks to their peculiar dexterity and adaptability to the shape of the lower gastrointestinal tract, allowing a virtually painless examination of the colon. In some instances, when alternatives to CC and RC are required, barium enema (BE), computed tomographic colonography (CTC), and colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) may be options. However, BE and CTC are limited by the need for subsequent investigations whenever suspicious lesions are found. In this narrative review, we discussed the current clinical applications of RC, CTC, and CCE, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of different endoscopic procedures, with a particular focus on RC. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Endoscopic Diagnosis and Tissue Resection Techniques)

► Show Figures