Gastric cancer preoperative staging is of outmost importance to assure proper management of the disease. Providing a relevant clinical stage relies on different imaging methods such as computed tomography (CT) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). We aimed to perform a network meta-analysis for gastric cancer clinical stage diagnostic tests, thus comparing the diagnostic accuracy of EUS vs. multidetector CT (MDCT) and EUS vs. EUS + MDCT. We plotted study estimates of pooled sensitivity and specificity on forest plots and summary receiver operating characteristic space to explore between-study variation in the performance of EUS, MDCT and EUS + MDCT for T1–T4, N0–N3, M0–M1 when data were available. Exploratory analyses were undertaken in RevMan 5. We included twelve studies with 2047 patients. Our results suggest that EUS was superior to MDCT in preoperative T1 and N staging. MDCT is more specific for the M stage but no significant difference in sensitivity was obtained. When comparing EUS vs. EUS + MDCT for T1 both sensitivity and specificity were not relevant. No significant differences were observed in T2–T4 stages. Even though EUS helped differentiate between the presence of invaded nodules, N stages should be carefully assessed by both methods since there is not sufficient data.

(1) Background: The assessment of mortality and rebleeding rate in upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is essential, and several prognostic scores have been proposed. Some patients with UGIB did not undergo endoscopy, either because they refused the procedure, suffered from alcohol withdrawal symptoms or altered general status, or because the bleeding was severe enough to cause death before the endoscopy. The mortality risk in the subgroup of patients without endoscopy is poorly evaluated in the literature. (2) Methods: The purpose of the study was to identify the most useful scores for the assessment of in-hospital mortality in patients with UGIB with no endoscopy performed and no known etiology. A total of 198 patients with UGIB and no endoscopy performed were admitted between January 2017 and December 2021 and the accuracy of 12 prognostic scores and the Charlson comorbidity index for in-hospital mortality prediction were analyzed, as well as Child–Pugh Turcotte (CPT) and Meld scores in patients with cirrhosis. (3) Results: The mortality rate was 37.9%, higher than in variceal (21.9%, p < 0.0001) and non-variceal bleeding (7.4%, p < 0.0001). The most accurate scores by AUC were the International Bleeding score (INBS, 0.844), Glasgow Blatchford (0.783), MAP score (0.78), Iino (0.766), AIM65 and modified N-score (0.745 each), modified Glasgow-Blatchford (0.73), H3B2 and N-score (0.701); Rockall, Baylor, and T-score had an AUC below 0.7. MELD score was superior to CPT in patients with cirrhosis (AUC 0.811 versus 0.670). (4) Conclusions: The mortality rate in UGIB with no endoscopy was higher than in both variceal and non-variceal bleeding and was higher in the pandemic period but with no statistical significance (45.3% versus 32.14%, p = 0.0586), mainly because of positive cases. Only one case of rebleeding was noted; the hospitalization period was significantly shorter. The most accurate score was International Bleeding Score; the MELD score had a higher but moderate accuracy compared with CPT in patients with cirrhosis.

Introduction: In some cases, there may be a discrepancy between the symptomatology alleged by Crohn’s disease (CD) patients and the results of laboratory tests or imaging investigations. Ileocolonoscopy with biopsy is the primary investigation for diagnosing and monitoring CD patients. Cross-sectional imaging techniques such as CT or MR enterography (MRE) and intestinal ultrasonography (IUS) have been proposed as complementary methods to colonoscopy for a complete evaluation of this category of patients. This study aims to identify the role of IUS, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and MRE in evaluating ileal CD activity, using clinical severity scores (Crohn’s disease activity index—CDAI, Harvey–Bradshaw index—HBI) and faecal calprotectin or C-reactive protein (CRP) levels as reference methods. Materials and Methods: A total of 44 adult patients with ileal CD confirmed using an ileocolonoscopy with biopsy and histopathological examination were assessed by IUS, CEUS and MRE. The evaluation of the disease activity based on the results obtained from the cross-sectional imaging tests was carried out by using some severity scores available in the literature. The sensitivity and specificity of IUS + CEUS and MRE for differentiating active from inactive forms of CD were determined using CDAI, HBI, faecal calprotectin and CRP as reference methods. The accuracy of the results was assessed by the receiver operating characteristics method. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to determine the types of correlation. A p-value less than 0.05 suggested a statistically significant relationship. Results: Compared to CDAI, the best correlation was identified for Limberg score (r = 0.667, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.46, 0.8], p < 0.001), followed by MaRIAs score (r = 0.614, 95% CI [0.39, 0.77], p < 0.001). A sensitivity of 93.33% and a specificity of 71.43% (AUC = 0.98) were demonstrated in the case of Limberg score for differentiating patients with active disease from those in remission and for MaRIAs score a sensitivity of 100.00% and a specificity of 57.14% (AUC = 0.97). Regarding HBI, the best correlation was observed for MaRIAs score (r = 0.594, 95% CI [0.36, 0.76], p < 0.001). Also, faecal calprotectin showed the best correlation with MaRIAs score (r = 0.697, 95% CI [0.46, 0.84], p < 0.001), but in the case of CRP, there was only a weak correlation for all evaluated scores. Conclusions: Although magnetic resonance imaging does not appear to be superior to ultrasonography in terms of accuracy for differentiating active forms of CD from those in remission, the results of our study suggest that MRE associates a better correlation with clinical severity scores and faecal calprotectin levels compared to ultrasonography. More studies are needed to validate these results.

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) represents a major emergency, and patient management requires endoscopic assessment to ensure appropriate treatment. The impact of COVID-19 on patient mortality in UGIB may be related to the combination of respiratory failure and severe bleeding and indirectly to delayed admissions or a reduction in endoscopic procedures. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study involving patients admitted between March 2020 and December 2021 with UGIB and confirmed. Our objective was to compare these types of patients with those negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as with a pre-pandemic group of patients admitted between May 2018 and December 2019. Results: Thirty-nine patients (4.7%) with UGIB had an active COVID-19 infection. A higher mortality rate (58.97%) and a high risk of death (OR 9.04, p < 0.0001) were noted in the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly because of respiratory failure; endoscopy was not performed in half of the cases. Admissions for UGIB have decreased by 23.7% during the pandemic. Conclusions: COVID-19 infection in patients admitted for UGIB was associated with a higher mortality rate because of respiratory failure and possible delays in or contraindications of treatment.

Despite the numerous advances in tumor molecular biology and chemotherapy options, gastric adenocarcinoma is still the most frequent form of gastric cancer. One of the core proteins that regulates inter-cellular adhesion, E-cadherin plays important roles in tumorigenesis as well as in tumor progression; however, the exact expression changes and modulation that occur in gastric cancer are not yet fully understood. In an attempt to estimate if the synthesis/degradation balance matches the final membrane expression of this adhesion molecule in cancer tissue, we assessed the proportion of E-cadherin that is found in the Golgi vesicles as well as in the lysosomal pathway We utilized archived tissue fragments from 18 patients with well and poorly differentiated intestinal types of gastric cancer and 5 samples of normal gastric mucosa, by using high-magnification multispectral microscopy and high-resolution fluorescence deconvolution microscopy. Our data showed that E-cadherin is not only expressed in the membrane, but also in the cytoplasm of normal and tumor gastric epithelia. E-cadherin colocalization with the Golgian vesicles seemed to be increasing with less differentiated tumors, while co-localization with the lysosomal system decreased in tumor tissue; however, the membrane expression of the adhesion molecule clearly dropped from well to poorly differentiated tumors. Thus E-cadherin seems to be more abundantly synthetized than eliminated via lysosomes/exosomes in less differentiated tumors, suggesting that post-translational modifications, such as cleavage, conformational inactivation, or exocytosis, are responsible for the net drop of E-cadherin at the level of the membrane in more anaplastic tumors. This behavior is in perfect accordance with the concept of partial epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (P-EMT), when the E-cadherin expression of tumor cells is in fact not downregulated but redistributed away from the membrane in recycling vesicles. Moreover, our high-resolution deconvolution microscopy study showed for the first time, at the tissue level, the presence of Lysosome-associated membrane glycoprotein 1 (LAMP1)-positive exosomes/multivesicular bodies being trafficked across the membranes of tumor epithelial cells. Altogether, a myriad of putative modulatory pathways is available as a treatment turning point, even if we are to only consider the metabolism of membrane E-cadherin regulation. Future super-resolution microscopy studies are needed to clarify the extent of lysosome/exosome exchange between tumor cells and with the surrounding stroma, in histopathology samples or even in vivo.

This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) after neoadjuvant therapy (NT) for gastric cancer restaging by meta-analysis. We conducted a systematic search of studies published on PubMed and Web of Science up to 30th August 2021. Assessing the risk of bias in the included studies was done with the QUADAS-2 tool. We used R and Review Manager 5.4.1 for calculations and statistical analysis. To evaluate the diagnostic value of EUS after NT for gastric cancer restaging, we performed a meta-analysis on six studies, with a total of 283 patients, including true-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative results for T1-T4, N0. EUS as a diagnostic test for GC patients after chemotherapy has a relatively low DOR for the T2 (3.96) and T4 stages (4.79) and a relatively high partial AUC for the T2 (0.85) and T4 (0.71) stages. Our results reveal that the pooled sensitivity for T stages after chemotherapy is rather low (29–56%), except for the T3 stage (71%). A potential limitation of our study was the small number of included studies, but no significant heterogeneity was found between them. Our meta-analysis concludes that EUS is not recommended or is still under debate for GC restaging after NT.