Background: Glucagon-like peptide receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are associated with delayed gastric emptying and may increase the risk of aspiration due to retained gastric contents. There are no guidelines on peri-endoscopic use of GLP-1 RAs, and real-world outcomes in an ambulatory setting remain unknown. This study reports real-world data from an ambulatory center associated with a large tertiary hospital. Methods: A retrospective review of electronic medical records was conducted for patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) at a hospital-based outpatient center from January to June 2023. Exclusions included non-elective procedures, current opioid use, altered foregut anatomy, and known gastroparesis. All patients were on GLP-1 RAs before endoscopy and followed standard fasting protocols. Adverse event rates were recorded, and patients were divided into cohorts based on GLP-1 RA use. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses identified risk factors for food retention and complications. Results: A total of 1438 patients underwent elective EGD during the study period. Among the 1046 patients included, 73 (7%) were on GLP-1 RAs. The procedure was aborted in four patients (0.4%) due to gastric food retention, with two (50%) on GLP-1 RAs. Independent risk factors for food retention included GLP-1 RA use (OR: 9.19; 95% CI: 2.73–30.8; p = 0.0003) and diabetes (OR 5.6; 95% CI: 1.72–18.2; p = 0.004). Tirzepatide showed the strongest association (p = 0.0056). Factors that did not impact food retention included A1c, BMI, and gender. Protective factors were age (OR 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93–0.99; p = 0.02) and same-day colonoscopy (OR 0.18; 95% CI: 0.06–0.58; p = 0.003). Conclusions: GLP-1 RA use in diabetics increases the risk of retained gastric contents during elective EGD, particularly with tirzepatide, without increasing aspiration risk. Patients undergoing simultaneous colonoscopy had a lower risk of retained gastric contents. Further studies are needed to evaluate the impact of GLP-1 RAs on gastric food retention and procedural risk.

INTRODUCTION: Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD), which utilizes ESD knife along with snare-based resection, has been developed to overcome the technical complexity of conventional ESD (C-ESD). The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic outcomes of H-ESD vs C-ESD for nonpedunculated colorectal lesions ≥20 mm in size. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare H-ESD and C-ESD (Short-ESD trial). Patients with colorectal lesions between 20 and 50 mm in size were randomly assigned (1:1) to H-ESD or C-ESD. Primary outcome was procedure time/speed. Secondary outcomes were en bloc and complete (R0) resection rates and adverse event rates. RESULTS: A total of 89 patients (median age 63 years; 49.3% women) with the median polyp size of 30 mm underwent H-ESD (n = 40) and C-ESD (n = 49). The mean procedure time of H-ESD was significantly shorter than that of C-ESD (41.1 ± 16.3 vs 54.3 ± 28.2 minutes; P = 0.007). The en bloc and R0 resection rates trended lower in the H-ESD vs C-ESD groups (77.5% vs 87.8%; P = 0.26% and 72.5% vs 79.6%; P = 0.46) without reaching statistical significance. Adverse event rate was similar between H-ESD and C-ESD (10% vs 8.2%; P = 1.00). DISCUSSION: Both H-ESD and C-ESD were safe and effective for resection of large colorectal lesions. H-ESD was associated with a shorter procedure time. H-ESD may represent a viable alternative to C-ESD, with the main advantage being easy applicability of a snare-based technique for colorectal lesions. Future studies are needed to further define the most suitable lesions for H-ESD, as to optimize efficiency and safety without compromising resection outcomes. ClinicaTrials.gov NCT NCT05347446.

Boerhaave’s syndrome is a rare yet serious condition associated with high mortality and morbidity. Diagnosis of this syndrome is usually done with the aid of imaging and prompt management should be initiated to improve the outcomes. Treatment for this syndrome has been mainly surgical since its discovery by Herman Boerhaave; however, multiple endoscopic approaches have been successfully used recently with the advancement of this field. Here, we describe two cases of Boerhaave’s syndrome that were endoscopically managed along with a brief literature review of the different endoscopic methods used to manage this syndrome.

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) refer to eosinophilic infiltration of various sections of the gastrointestinal tract in the absence of secondary causes. Diagnosis of EGID requires histological evidence of eosinophilic infiltration of the GI tract. Here, we present a case of a young male with biopsy-proven eosinophilic gastroenteritis with a concomitant established diagnosis of immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). Presently, EGIDs remain an underexplored clinical entity. While its pathophysiology is not fully understood at this time, TH2 mediated activation of B-cells and subsequent stimulation of eosinophils locally appears to be at play. This is in contrast to the TH1 predominant cytokine profile underlying ITP, which this patient also has. Treatment typically involves dietary modifications and glucocorticoids.

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A) is a systemic inflammatory syndrome that presents with a heterogeneous collection of signs and symptoms in adults. Here we present a case of a 38-year-old male who met the case definition of the MIS-A four weeks after a mild, symptomatic case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) despite receiving casirivimab-imdevimab (REGEN-COV). Given the presence of signs and symptoms consistent with MIS-A, the patient was started on intravenous immune globulin (IVIG) and IV methylprednisolone. He promptly demonstrated clinical improvement over the next several days.

A 43-year-old male presented to his primary care physician’s office with a complaint of painless rectal bleeding with a concomitant weight loss of 10-15 pounds and intermittent abdominal pain. Endoscopic evaluation was remarkable for a 5 mm rectal polyp roughly 10 cm from the anal verge. Resection was performed and the pathology was consistent with a low-grade neuroendocrine/carcinoid tumor. Immunostaining for synaptophysin, chromogranin, CD56, and CAM5.2 were positive while staining for CK20 was negative. Given the absence of metastasis on radiographic and endoscopic evaluation, the patient was managed conservatively thereafter with observation. Despite having an indolent clinical course, resection is recommended for all rectal neuroendocrine tumors. Locoregional endoscopic resection versus radical resection can be used for adequate tissue removal depending on the characteristics of the tumor and the degree of invasion.