Research conducted during the past 30 years has increased our understanding of the mechanisms involved in colorectal cancer initiation and development. The findings have demonstrated the existence of at least three pathways: chromosomal instability, microsatellite instability and CpG island methylator phenotype. Importantly, new studies have shown that inflammation and microRNAs contribute to colorectal carcinogenesis. Recent data have demonstrated that several genetic and epigenetic changes are important in determining patient prognosis and survival. Furthermore, some of these mechanisms are related to patients’ response to drugs, such as aspirin, which could be used for both chemoprevention and treatment in specific settings. Thus, in the near future, we could be able to predict disease behavior based on molecular markers found on tumors, and direct the best treatment options for patients.

Background and aims. The add-on EndoRings has been claimed to improve adenoma detection at colonoscopy, but available data are inconsistent. When testing a new technology, parallel and crossover methodologies measure different outcomes, leaving uncertainty on their correspondence. Aims of this study were to compare the diagnostic yield and miss rate of the EndoRings for colorectal neoplasia.Methods. Consecutive subjects undergoing colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) within organized screening program in 7 Italian centers, were randomized between a parallel (EndoRings or Standard) or a crossover (EndoRings/Standard or Standard/EndoRings) methodology. Outcomes measures were the detection rates of (advanced) adenomas (A-)ADR in the parallel arms and miss rate of adenomas in the crossover arms. Results:Of 958 eligible subjects, 927 (317 EndoRings; 317 Standard; 142 EndoRings/Standard; 151 Standard/Endorings) were included in the final analysis. In the parallel arms (mean ADR: 51.3%; mean AADR: 25.4%), no difference between Standard and EndoRings was found for both ADR (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.95-1.28) and A-ADR (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.88-1.51), as well as for the mean number of adenomas and advanced adenomas per patient (EndoRings: 1.9±1.3 and 1.0±1.2; Standard 2.1±1.5 and 1.0±1.2; p=NS for both comparisons). In the crossover arms, no difference in miss rate for adenomas between EndoRings and Standard was found at per-polyp (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.97-2.10), as well as at per-patient analysis (24% vs 26%; p=0.76). Conclusions:No statistically significant difference in diagnostic yield and miss rate between EndoRings and Standard colonoscopy was detected in FIT+ patients. A clinically relevant correspondence between miss and detection rates was shown, supporting a cause-effect relationship.

BACKGROUND Collagenous colitis (CC) and lymphocytic colitis (LC) are chronic inflammatory disorders of the colon. There is a paucity of data on differences in etiology, natural history, and treatment response between CC and LC. METHODS Between 2002 to 2013, we identified new diagnoses of CC and LC using the Research Patient Data Registry in a tertiary referral center. We used Chi Square or Fischer exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to compare the differences in clinical characteristics, treatment types, and response rates between LC and CC. RESULTS Through 2013, we confirmed 131 patients with a new diagnosis of MC (55 LC, 76 CC). Compared to cases of LC, patients with a diagnosis of CC were more likely to be women (86% vs. 69%, P = 0.03), have elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (mean 28 vs. 13 mm/hr, P = 0.04), and less likely to be diabetic (5% vs. 18%, P = 0.02). Budesonide was the most effective treatment for both CC and LC (94% and 80%, respectively). However, there were no statistically significant differences in response to various treatments according to the type of microscopic colitis (All P > 0.10). Older age at the time of diagnosis was associated with better response to bismuth subsalicylate (OR 1.76; 95% CI, 1.21–2.56 for every 5-year increase) for both CC and LC. CONCLUSION Despite differences in the clinical characteristics, response rates to available treatments appeared to be similar in both LC and CC. Older patients may have a better response to bismuth subsalicylate therapy.

Background Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage is suggested as the first approach in the management of symptomatic and complex walled-off pancreatic necrosis. Dual approach with percutaneous drainage could be the best choice when the necrosis is deep extended till the pelvic paracolic gutter; however, the available catheter could not be large enough to drain solid necrosis neither to perform necrosectomy, entailing a higher need for surgery. Therefore, percutaneous endoscopic necrosectomy through a large bore percutaneous self-expandable metal stent has been proposed. Case presentation In this study, we present the case of a 61-year-old man admitted to our hospital with a history of sepsis and persistent multiorgan failure secondary to walled-off pancreatic necrosis due to acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Firstly, the patient underwent transgastric endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage using a lumen-apposing metal stent and three sessions of direct endoscopic necrosectomy. Because of recurrence of multiorgan failure and the presence of the necrosis deeper to the pelvic paracolic gutter at computed tomography scan, we decided to perform percutaneous endoscopic necrosectomy using an esophageal self-expandable metal stent. After four sessions of necrosectomy, the collection was resolved without complications. Therefore, we perform a revision of the literature, in order to provide the state-of-art on this technique. The available data are, to date, derived by case reports and case series, which showed high rates both of technical and clinical success. However, a not negligible rate of adverse events has been reported, mainly represented by fistulas and abdominal pain. Conclusion Dual approach, using lumen apposing metal stent and percutaneous self-expandable metal stent, is a compelling option of treatment for patients affected by symptomatic, complex walled-off pancreatic necrosis, allowing to directly remove large amounts of necrosis avoiding surgery. Percutaneous endoscopic necrosectomy seems a promising technique that could be part of the step-up-approach, before emergency surgery. However, to date, it should be reserved in referral centers, where a multidisciplinary team is disposable.