Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are chronic and disabling conditions that, uncontrolled, lead to irreversible bowel damage and associated comorbidities. Despite the new era of biological therapies, IBDs remain not curative. The treatment purpose is to induce endoscopic remission, reduce the progression of the disease and improve the quality of life. Optimal and early treatment could enable the prevention of their complications. Small molecules, administrated as oral agents, have the capacity of overcoming the limitations of biologic agents (i.e., parenteral administration, rapidity of action and primary and secondary non-responsiveness). Of special interest are results from the use of oral sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulators (ozanimod, etrasimod, fingolimod and laquinimod), based on S1P activities to target lymphocyte recirculation in the mucosa, acting as immunosuppressive agents. Most S1P modulators are reported to be safe and effective in the treatment of both UC and CD. High and satisfactory rates of clinical remission as well as endoscopic improvement and remission can be achieved with these molecules. Safety alarms remain rather low, although the S1P binding to two of its G protein-coupled receptors, 2 and 3 (S1PR2 and S1PR3), may be associated with cardiovascular risks. Cost-effectiveness studies and head-to-head trials are needed to better define their place in therapy. This review summarizes these emerging data published by PubMed and EMBASE databases and from ongoing clinical trials on the safety and efficacy of selectivity of S1P modulators in the treatment of IBD.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention depends on effective colonoscopy; yet variability in adenoma detection rates (ADRs) and missed lesions remain significant hurdles. Artificial intelligence-powered computer-aided detection (CADe) systems offer promising advancements in enhancing polyp detection. This review examines the role of CADe in improving ADR and reducing adenoma miss rates (AMRs) while addressing its broader clinical implications. CADe has demonstrated consistent improvements in ADRs and AMRs; largely by detecting diminutive polyps, but shows limited efficacy in identifying advanced adenomas or sessile serrated lesions. Challenges such as operator deskilling and the need for enhanced algorithms persist. Combining CADe with adjunctive techniques has shown potential for further optimizing performance. While CADe has standardized detection quality; its long-term impact on CRC incidence and mortality remains inconclusive. Future research should focus on refining CADe technology and assessing its effectiveness in reducing the global burden of CRC.

INTRODUCTION: The adoption of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still limited in the West. A recent randomized trial showed that ESD is more effective and only slightly riskier than piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection; reproducibility outside expert centers was questioned. We evaluated the results according to the annual case volume in a multicentric prospective cohort. METHODS: Between September 2019 and September 2022, colorectal ESD was consecutively performed at 13 participating centers classified as low volume (LV), middle volume (MV), and high volume (HV). The main procedural outcomes were assessed. Multivariate and propensity score matching analyses were performed. RESULTS: Three thousand seven hundred seventy ESDs were included. HV centers treated larger and more often colonic lesions than MV and LV centers. En bloc , R0, and curative resection rates were 95.2%, 87.4%, and 83.2%, respectively, and were higher at HV than at MV and LV centers. HV centers also achieved a faster dissection speed. Delayed bleeding and surgery for complications rates were 5.4% and 0.8%, respectively, without significant differences. The perforation rate (overall: 9%) was higher at MV than at LV and HV centers. Lesion characteristics, but not volume center, were independently associated with both R1 resection and perforation. However, after propensity score matching, R0 rates were significantly higher at HV than at LV centers, and perforation rates were significantly higher at MV than at HV centers. DISCUSSION: Colorectal ESD can be successfully implemented in the West, even in nonexpert centers. However, difficult lesions must still be referred to experts.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, with the highest incidence reported in high-income countries. However, because of the slow progression of neoplastic precursors, along with the opportunity for their endoscopic detection and resection, a well-designed endoscopic screening program is expected to strongly decrease colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. In this regard, quality of colonoscopy has been clearly related with the risk of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Recently, the development of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in the medical field has been growing in interest. Through machine learning processes, and, more recently, deep learning, if a very high numbers of learning samples are available, AI systems may automatically extract specific features from endoscopic images/videos without human intervention, helping the endoscopists in different aspects of their daily practice. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on AI-aided endoscopy, and to outline its potential role in colorectal cancer prevention.

Background and objectives: Subepithelial lesions (SELs) of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract present a diagnostic challenge due to their heterogeneous nature and varied clinical manifestations. Usually, SELs are small and asymptomatic; generally discovered during routine endoscopy or radiological examinations. Currently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is the best tool to characterize gastric SELs. Materials and methods: For this review, the research and the study selection were conducted using the PubMed database. Articles in English language were reviewed from August 2019 to July 2024. Results: This review aims to summarize the international literature to examine and illustrate the progress in the last five years of endosonographic diagnostics and treatment of gastric SELs. Conclusions: Endoscopic ultrasound is the preferred option for the diagnosis of sub-epithelial lesions. In most of the cases, EUS-guided tissue sampling is mandatory; however, ancillary techniques (elastography, CEH-EUS, AI) may help in both diagnosis and prognostic assessment.

International guidelines recommend a treat-to-target strategy with a close monitoring of disease activity and therapeutic response in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Colonoscopy (CS) represents the current first-line procedure for evaluating disease activity in IBD. However, as it is expensive, invasive and poorly accepted by patients, CS is not appropriate for frequent and repetitive reassessments of disease activity. Recently, cross-sectional imaging techniques have been increasingly shown as reliable tools for assessing IBD activity. While computed tomography (CT) is hampered by radiation risks, routine implementation of magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) for close monitoring is limited by its costs, low availability and long examination time. Novel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based techniques, such as diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), can overcome some of these weaknesses and have been shown as valuable options for IBD monitoring. Bowel ultrasound (BUS) is a noninvasive, highly available, cheap, and well accepted procedure that has been demonstrated to be as accurate as CS and MRE for assessing and monitoring disease activity in IBD. Furthermore, as BUS can be quickly performed at the point-of-care, it allows for real-time clinical decision making. This review summarizes the current evidence on the use of cross-sectional imaging techniques as cost-effective, noninvasive and reliable alternatives to CS for monitoring patients with IBD.