Manol Jovani

Dr. Manol Jovani

Gastroenterology, Maimonides Medical Center, New York, USA
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

18Years (2009-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
9 October 2023 in Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BWBas L. A. M. Weusten
Bas L. A. M. Weusten
RBRaf Bisschops
Raf Bisschops
MDMario Dinis-Ribeiro
Mario Dinis-Ribeiro
MPMassimiliano di Pietro
Massimiliano di Pietro
OPOliver Pech
Oliver Pech
RPRoos E. Pouw
Roos E. Pouw
Main Recommendations: MR1 ESGE recommends the following standards for Barrett esophagus (BE) surveillance:– a minimum of 1-minute inspection time per cm of BE length during a surveillance endoscopy– photodocumentation of landmarks, the BE segment including one picture per cm of BE length, and the esophagogastric junction in retroflexed position, and any visible lesions– use of the Prague and (for visible lesions) Paris classification– collection of biopsies from all visible abnormalities (if present), followed by random four-quadrant biopsies for every 2-cm BE length.Strong recommendation, weak quality of evidence. MR2 ESGE suggests varying surveillance intervals for different BE lengths. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 1 cm and < 3 cm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 3 cm and < 10 cm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 10 cm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of < 1 cm, no routine biopsies or endoscopic surveillance are advised.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR3 ESGE suggests that, if a patient has reached 75 years of age at the time of the last surveillance endoscopy and/or the patient’s life expectancy is less than 5 years, the discontinuation of further surveillance endoscopies can be considered. Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence. MR4 ESGE recommends offering endoscopic eradication therapy using ablation to patients with BE and low grade dysplasia (LGD) on at least two separate endoscopies, both confirmed by a second experienced pathologist.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR5 ESGE recommends endoscopic ablation treatment for BE with confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD) without visible lesions, to prevent progression to invasive cancer.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR6 ESGE recommends offering complete eradication of all remaining Barrett epithelium by ablation after endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities containing any degree of dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. MR7 ESGE recommends endoscopic resection as curative treatment for T1a Barrett’s cancer with well/moderate differentiation and no signs of lymphovascular invasion.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR8 ESGE suggests that low risk submucosal (T1b) EAC (i. e. submucosal invasion depth ≤ 500 µm AND no [lympho]vascular invasion AND no poor tumor differentiation) can be treated by endoscopic resection, provided that adequate follow-up with gastroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and computed tomography (CT)/positrion emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is performed in expert centers.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR9 ESGE suggests that submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (tumor invasion > 500 µm into the submucosa), and/or (lympho)vascular invasion, and/or a poor tumor differentiation should be considered high risk. Complete staging and consideration of additional treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery) or strict endoscopic follow-up should be undertaken on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR10 a ESGE recommends that the first endoscopic follow-up after successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) of BE is performed in an expert center.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence. b ESGE recommends careful inspection of the neo-squamocolumnar junction and neo-squamous epithelium with high definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy during post-EET surveillance, to detect recurrent dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. c ESGE recommends against routine four-quadrant biopsies of neo-squamous epithelium after successful EET of BE.Strong recommendation, low level of evidence. d ESGE suggests, after successful EET, obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies just distal to a normal-appearing neo-squamocolumnar junction to detect dysplasia in the absence of visible lesions.Weak recommendation, low level of evidence. e ESGE recommends targeted biopsies are obtained where there is a suspicion of recurrent BE in the tubular esophagus, or where there are visible lesions suspicious for dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. MR11 After successful EET, ESGE recommends the following surveillance intervals:– For patients with a baseline diagnosis of HGD or EAC:at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.– For patients with a baseline diagnosis of LGD:at 1, 3, and 5 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence.

30 April 2021 in Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MSManon C.W. Spaander
Manon C.W. Spaander
RBRuben D. van der Bogt
Ruben D. van der Bogt
TBTodd H. Baron
Todd H. Baron
DADavid Albers
David Albers
DBDaniel Blero
Daniel Blero
JHJeanin E. van Hooft
Jeanin E. van Hooft
Main recommendations: Malignant disease 1 ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) for palliation of malignant dysphagia over laser therapy, photodynamic therapy, and esophageal bypass.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 2 ESGE recommends brachytherapy as a valid alternative, alone or in addition to stenting, in esophageal cancer patients with malignant dysphagia and expected longer life expectancy.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 3 ESGE recommends esophageal SEMS placement for sealing malignant tracheoesophageal or bronchoesophageal fistulas. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 ESGE does not recommend SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery or before preoperative chemoradiotherapy because it is associated with a high incidence of adverse events. Other options such as feeding tube placement are preferable. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. Benign disease 5 ESGE recommends against the use of SEMSs as first-line therapy for the management of benign esophageal strictures because of the potential for adverse events, the availability of alternative therapies, and their cost. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 6 ESGE suggests consideration of temporary placement of self-expandable stents for refractory benign esophageal strictures. Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7 ESGE suggests that fully covered SEMSs be preferred over partially covered SEMSs for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures because of their very low risk of embedment and ease of removability. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8 ESGE recommends the stent-in-stent technique to remove partially covered SEMSs that are embedded in the esophageal wall. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9 ESGE recommends that temporary stent placement can be considered for the treatment of leaks, fistulas, and perforations. No specific type of stent can be recommended, and the duration of stenting should be individualized. Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 10 ESGE recommends considering placement of a fully covered large-diameter SEMS for the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding refractory to medical, endoscopic, and/or radiological therapy, or as initial therapy for patients with massive bleeding. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

8 November 2012 in Liver International
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ATArmando Tripodi
Armando Tripodi
MPMassimo Primignani
Massimo Primignani
VCVeena Chantarangkul
Veena Chantarangkul
LLLaura Lemma
Laura Lemma
MJManol Jovani
Manol Jovani
PMPier M. Mannucci
Pier M. Mannucci

1 August 2016 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ARAlessandro Repici
Alessandro Repici
ASAaron J. Small
Aaron J. Small
AMAaron Mendelson
Aaron Mendelson
MJManol Jovani
Manol Jovani
LCLoredana Correale
Loredana Correale
MKMichael L. Kochman
Michael L. Kochman

1 July 2021 in Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SGSarah S Al Ghamdi
Sarah S Al Ghamdi
JFJad Farha
Jad Farha
RMRobert A. Moran
Robert A. Moran
MPMathieu Pioche
Mathieu Pioche
FMFrédéric Moll
Frédéric Moll
MKMouen A. Khashab
Mouen A. Khashab
Background Treatment of Zenker’s diverticulum has evolved from open surgery to endoscopic techniques, including flexible and rigid endoscopic septotomy, and more recently, peroral endoscopic myotomy (Z-POEM). This study compared the effectiveness of flexible and rigid endoscopic septotomy with that of Z-POEM. Methods Consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic septotomy (flexible/rigid) or Z-POEM for Zenker’s diverticulum between 1/2016 and 9/2019 were included. Primary outcomes were clinical success (decrease in Dakkak and Bennett dysphagia score to ≤ 1), clinical failure, and clinical recurrence. Secondary outcomes included technical success and rate/severity of adverse events. Results 245 patients (110 females, mean age 72.63 years, standard deviation [SD] 12.37 years) from 12 centers were included. Z-POEM was the most common management modality (n = 119), followed by flexible (n = 86) and rigid (n = 40) endoscopic septotomy. Clinical success was 92.7 % for Z-POEM, 89.2 % for rigid septotomy, and 86.7 % for flexible septotomy (P = 0.26). Symptoms recurred in 24 patients (15 Z-POEM during a mean follow-up of 282.04 [SD 300.48] days, 6 flexible, 3 rigid [P = 0.47]). Adverse events occurred in 30.0 % rigid septotomy patients, 16.8 % Z-POEM patients, and 2.3 % flexible septotomy patients (P < 0.05). Conclusions There was no difference in outcomes between the three treatment approaches for symptomatic Zenker’s diverticulum. Rigid endoscopic septotomy was associated with the highest rate of complications, while flexible endoscopic septotomy appeared to be the safest. Recurrence following Z-POEM was similar to flexible and rigid endoscopic septotomy. Prospective studies with long-term follow-up are required. * Sarah S. Al Ghamdi and Jad Farha are primary coauthors. Received: 28 December 2020 Accepted: 17 May 2021 Publication Date: 01 July 2021 (online) © 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

31 October 2013 in Current Drug Targets
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MAMariangela Allocca
Mariangela Allocca
MJManol Jovani
Manol Jovani
GFGionata Fiorino
Gionata Fiorino
SSStefan Schreiber
Stefan Schreiber
SDSilvio Danese
Silvio Danese
Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are chronic, relapsing, and destructive inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. Both Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) seem to arise from an impaired dialog between the environment and gut microbiota in genetically susceptible hosts, leading to an inappropriate immune activation and resulting in the over-production of pro-inflammatory cytokines. IL-6 is a key modulator of inflammatory response. It is a phylogenetically important cytokine with relevance in IBD, as well as in other chronic inflammatory diseases and cancer. Influencing the production of this cytokine can change the balance of effector CD4+ T cell subsets and induce B cell antibody production. Moreover, given IL-6 is mostly produced from innate immune cells such as macrophages, neutrophils and mast cells, it is a strategic bridge between the innate and the adaptive system. Interestingly, IL-6 induced signaling can be primarily seen in a relatively small number of IL-6 responsive cells whereas in a chronic phase of inflammation it is able to activate almost all cells of the body through a process known as trans-signaling. In this review, we discuss the role of IL-6 in chronic inflammation, with particular emphasis on its role in CD and UC, and we explore the potential to develop anti-IL-6 agents for IBD treatment.