Aim: To determine the predictability of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN) and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guideline with regard to appropriate endoscopic practice in children, positive endoscopic findings and contributive yield in clinical practice.
Methods: This was a descriptive, retrospective analysis, conducted at the Department of Paediatrics, University Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia. All children who had esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy from January 2008 to June 2011 were included. An endoscopy was considered appropriate when its indication complied with the NASPGHAN and ASGE guideline. All endoscopic findings were classified as either positive (presence of any endoscopic or histologic abnormality) or negative (no or minor abnormality, normal histology); effecting a positive contributive (a change in therapeutic decisions or prognostic consequences) or non-contributive yield (no therapeutic or prognostic consequences).
Results: Overall, 76% of the 345 procedures (231 EGD alone, 26 colonoscopy alone, 44 combined EGD and colonoscopy) performed in 301 children (median age 7.0 years, range 3 months to 18 years) had a positive endoscopic finding. Based on the NASPGHAN and ASGE guideline, 99.7% of the procedures performed were considered as appropriate. The only inappropriate procedure (0.3%) was in a child who had EGD for assessment of the healing of gastric ulcer following therapy in the absence of any symptoms. The overall positive contributive yield for a change in diagnosis and/or management was 44%. The presence of a positive endoscopic finding was more likely to effect a change in the therapeutic plan than an alteration of the initial diagnosis. A total of 20 (5.8%) adverse events were noted, most were minor and none was fatal.
Conclusion: The NASPGHAN and ASGE guideline is more likely to predict a positive endoscopic finding but is less sensitive to effect a change in the initial clinical diagnosis or the subsequent therapeutic plan.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3870562 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i47.9077 | DOI Listing |
Gastrointest Endosc
December 2024
Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for strategies to diagnose and manage GERD. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework and serves as an update to the 2014 ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the management of GERD. This updated guideline addresses the indications for endoscopy in patients with GERD as well as in the emerging population of patients who develop GERD after sleeve gastrectomy or peroral endoscopic myotomy.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFClin Transl Gastroenterol
December 2024
Harvard Medical School, Boston MA.
Introduction: We aimed to analyze gastrointestinal guidelines to assess quality of evidence and strength of recommendation.
Methods: We abstracted clinical practice guidelines and guidance statements from 4 American GI societies (ACG, AGA, ASGE and AASLD) and the United States Multi-Society Task Forc.
Results: Of the 3,609 statements analyzed, only 13% were supported by high level of evidence.
Gastrointest Endosc
January 2025
Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Gastrointest Endosc
October 2024
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Background And Aims: Gastric variceal bleeding occurs less commonly than bleeding from esophageal varices (EVs), although it is associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Bleeding from gastroesophageal varices type 1 (GOV1) is treated like EVs. In contrast, other forms of gastric variceal bleeding, including gastroesophageal varices type 2 (GOV2) and isolated gastric varices types 1 (IGV1) and 2 (IGV2), are treated with varying endoscopic approaches.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFGastrointest Endosc
October 2024
Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!