PV stumps in AF patients with previous pneumonectomy are electrically active and are frequently the sites of active firing. Isolation of these PV stumps can be accomplished safely and effectively using catheter ablation with no practical concern for PV stenosis or compromising PV stump integrity.

Gastrointestinal cancer is one of the major causes of death worldwide. Hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes constitute about 5-10% of all cancers. About 20-25% of undiagnosed cases have a possible hereditary component, which is not yet established. In the last few decades, the advance in genomics has led to the discovery of multiple cancer predisposition genes in gastrointestinal cancer. Physicians should be aware of these syndromes to identify high-risk patients and offer genetic testing to prevent cancer death. In this review, we describe clinical manifestations, genetic testing and its challenges, diagnosis and management of the major hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes.

Background Interval colorectal cancers may be associated with a low serrated polyp detection rate (SDR) and advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR). We aimed to determine the SDR and AADR for endoscopists in a United States multicenter cohort. Methods We included average-risk screening colonoscopies from five medical centers in the United States. Endoscopists with data on at least 100 average-risk screening colonoscopies were included. We calculated median SDR and AADR for endoscopists with adequate adenoma detection rates (ADRs) > 25 %. We analyzed the relationship between ADR and SDR, and between ADR and AADR using nonparametric Spearman correlation coefficients, scatter plots, and linear regression. Results We included 3513 screening colonoscopies performed by 26 gastroenterologists. The mean age of patients was 56.8 years (SD 7.4) and 1585 (45 %) were male. All but one endoscopist had an ADR above 25 %. There was a significant positive but modest correlation between ADR and SDR (rho = 0.67, P < 0.01), and between ADR and AADR (rho = 0.56, P < 0.01). For endoscopists with an adequate ADR, median (interquartile range) ADR was 43 % (32.0 % – 48.6 %), median SDR was 8.4 % (7.3 % – 11.4 %), and median AADR was 9.3 % (6.4 % – 12.6 %). Conclusion A significant percentage of endoscopists have either a low SDR or low AADR despite an adequate ADR, justifying the need for separate SDR and AADR benchmarks. Based on our multicenter cohort, endoscopists with adequate ADRs had a median SDR and median AADR of about 8 % and 9 %, respectively.

Background Splanchnic vein thrombosis is a well-recognized local vascular complication of acute pancreatitis (AP), estimated to occur in approximately 15% of patients. While splanchnic vein recanalization occurs spontaneously in approximately one third of patients, severe complications such as bowel ischemia and liver failure have also been reported. At present, there is no consensus on whether patients presenting with AP-associated splanchnic vein thrombosis should receive therapeutic anticoagulation. Methods We searched multiple databases from inception through December 2020 to collect studies that compared the clinical outcomes of patients with AP and splanchnic vein thrombosis who received therapeutic anticoagulation (AC group) with those who did not (N-AC group). A meta-analysis was performed to calculate the relative risk (RR) of vessel recanalization, bleeding complications, collateral formation and death in the 2 groups. Results Seven studies with 8353 patients, 339 of whom had splanchnic vein thrombosis, were included in the final analysis. A total of 154 patients (45.4%) had acute severe pancreatitis. A significantly higher proportion of patients had vessel recanalization in the AC group: RR 1.6, 95% confidence interval 1.17-2.27; I 2 =0%; P=0.004. There was no difference between the 2 groups in the RR of bleeding complications, collateral formation and death. Conclusions Our analysis demonstrated that, among patients with AP-associated splanchnic vein thrombosis, therapeutic anticoagulation resulted in recanalization of the involved vessels without significantly increasing the risk of bleeding complications. There was no difference in the RR of death or the rates of collateral vessel formation during the follow up.

Background and study aims Ulcers with high-risk stigmata have significant rebleeding rates despite standard endoscopic therapy. Data on over-the-scope clip (OTSC) for recurrent bleeding is promising but data on first line therapy is lacking. We report comparative outcomes of OTSC as first-line therapy versus standard endoscopic therapy in ulcers with high-risk stigmata. Patients and methods Consecutive adults who underwent endoscopic therapy for ulcers with high-risk stigmata between July 2019 to September 2020 were included. Patients were grouped into OTSC or standard therapy based on first-line therapy used on index endoscopy. Outcomes measured included: 1) intra-procedural hemostasis based on endoscopic documentation of adequate hemostasis; 2) 7-day rebleeding (> 2 g/dL drop in hemoglobin, hematochezia or hemorrhagic shock); 3) cost of endoscopic interventions; and 4) procedure duration measured as endoscope insertion to removal time. Cost of tools used during the index endoscopy was included. Results Sixty-eight patients were included, 47 were in standard therapy and 21 in the OTSC group. Hemostasis was achieved in 95.2 % in the OTSC group compared to 83.0 % in the standard therapy group (P = 0.256, number needed to treat [NNT]: 9). Procedure time was shorter in the OTSC group (23 vs. 16 minutes, P = 0.002). Cost of endoscopic interventions were comparable, P = 0.203. Early rebleeding was less often in OTSC group, two (9.5 %) compared to 10 (21.3 %) in standard therapy group, NNT 9. Conclusions Use of OTSCs as first-line treatment for ulcers bleed probably improves hemostasis and decreases early rebleeding. Use of OTSC as first-line therapy shortened procedure duration without increasing the cost of endoscopic interventions.