Background and study aims Acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) due to peptic ulcer disease (PUD) remains a common and challenging emergency managed by gastroenterologists. The proper role of endoscopic suturing on the management of PUD-related UGIB is unknown. Patients and methods This is an international case series of patients who underwent endoscopic suturing for bleeding PUD. Primary outcome was rate of immediate hemostasis and rate of early rebleeding (within 72 hours). Secondary outcomes included technical success, delayed rebleeding (> 72 hours), and rate of adverse events (AEs). Results Ten patients (mean age 66.7 years, 30 % female) were included in this study. Nine (90 %) had prior failed endoscopy hemostasis with an average of 1.4 ± 0.7 (range 1 – 3) prior endoscopic sessions. Forrest classification was Ib in 5 (50 %), IIa in 3 (30 %), IIb in 1(10 %), and IIc in 1 (10 %). Mean suturing time was 13.4 ± 5.6 (range 3.5 to 20) minutes. Technical success was 100 %. Rate of immediate hemostasis was 100 % and rate of early rebleeding was 0 %. Mean number of sutures was 1.5 (range, 1 – 4). No AEs were observed. Delayed recurrent bleeding was not observed in any cases after a median of 11 months (range 2 – 56), after endoscopic suturing. Conclusions Oversewing of a bleeding or high-risk ulcer using endoscopic suturing appears to be a safe and effective method for achieving endoscopic hemostasis. It may be considered as rescue endoscopic therapy when primary endoscopic hemostasis fails to control the bleeding or when hemorrhage recurs after successful control of bleeding. ^* These authors contributed equally.

Background and study aims Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) allows for treatment of epithelial and sub-epithelial lesions (SELs) unsuitable to conventional resection techniques. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of clip-assisted method for non-exposed EFTR using FTRD or over-the-scope clip of gastrointestinal tumors. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of histologic complete resection (R0). Secondary outcomes of interest were the rate of enbloc resection, FTR, adverse events, and post-EFTR surgery. Random-effects model was used to calculate pooled estimates and generate forest plots. Results Eighteen studies with 730 patients and 733 lesions were included in the analyses. Indications for EFTR were difficult/residual colorectal adenoma, adenoma at a diverticulum or appendiceal orifice and early cancer (n = 634), colorectal SELs (n = 42), and upper gastrointestinal lesions (n = 51), other colonic lesions (n = 6). Median size of lesions was 13.5 mm. There were 22 failed EFTR attempts. Pooled overall R0 resection rate was 82 % (95 % CI: 75, 89). The pooled overall FTR rate was 83 % (95 % CI: 77, 89). The pooled overall enbloc resection rate was 95 (95 % CI: 92, 96). The pooled estimates for perforation and bleeding were < 0.1 % and 2 %, respectively. Following EFTR, a total of 110 patients underwent surgery for any reason [pooled rate 7 % (95 % 2, 14). The pooled rates for post-EFTR surgery due to invasive cancer, for non-curative endoscopic resection and for adverse events were 4 %, < 0.1 % and < 0.1 %, respectively. No mortality related to EFTR was noted. Conclusions EFTR appears to be safe and effective for gastrointestinal lesions that are not amenable to conventional endoscopic resection. This technique should be considered as an alternative to surgery in selected cases.

Background and study aims Little is known about outcomes of advanced endoscopic resection (ER) for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with dysplasia. The aim of our meta-analysis was to estimate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for dysplastic lesions in patients with IBD. Methods We performed a systematic review through Jan 2021 to identify studies of IBD with dysplasia that was treated by EMR or ESD. We estimated the pooled rates of complete ER, adverse events, post-ER surgery, and recurrence. Proportions were pooled by random effect models. Results Eleven studies including 506 patients and 610 lesions were included. Mean lesion size was 23 mm. The pooled rate of complete ER was 97.9 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 95.3 % to 99.7 %). The pooled rate of endoscopic perforation was 0.8 % (95 % CI:0.1 % to 2.2 %) while bleeding occurred in 1.6 % of patients (95 %CI:0.4 % to 3.3 %). Overall, 6.6 % of patients (95 %CI:3.6 % to 10.2 %) underwent surgery after an ER. Among 471 patients who underwent surveillance, local recurrence occurred in 4.9 % patients (95 % CI:1.0 % to 10.7 %) and metachronous lesions occurred in 7.4 % patients (95 %CI:1.5 % to 16 %) over a median follow-up of 33 months. Metachronous colorectal cancer (CRC) was detected in 0.2 % of patients (95 %CI:0 % to 2.2 %) during the surveillance period. Conclusions Advanced ER is safe and effective in the management of large dysplastic lesions in IBD and warrants consideration as first-line therapy. Although the risk of developing CRC after ER is low, meticulous endoscopic surveillance is crucial to monitor for local or metachronous recurrence of dysplasia.