BACKGROUND & AIMS Narrow-band imaging (NBI) allows real-time histologic classification of colorectal polyps. We investigated whether endoscopists without prior training in NBI can achieve the following thresholds recommended by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: for diminutive colorectal polyps characterized with high confidence, a ≥90% negative predictive value for adenomas in the rectosigmoid and a ≥90% agreement in surveillance intervals. METHODS Twenty-six endoscopists from 2 tertiary care centers underwent standardized training in NBI interpretation. Endoscopists made real-time predictions of diminutive colorectal polyp histology and surveillance interval predictions based on NBI. Their performance was evaluated by comparing predicted with actual findings from histologic analysis. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess predictors of performance. Cumulative summation analysis was used to characterize learning curves. RESULTS The endoscopists performed 1451 colonoscopies and made 3012 diminutive polyp predictions (74.3% high confidence) using NBI. They made 898 immediate post-procedure surveillance interval predictions. An additional 505 surveillance intervals were determined with histology input. The overall negative predictive value for high-confidence characterizations in the rectosigmoid was 94.7% (95% confidence interval: 92.6%–96.8%) and the surveillance interval agreement was 91.2% (95% confidence interval: 89.7%–92.7%). Overall, 97.0% of surveillance interval predictions would have brought patients back on time or early. High-confidence characterization was the strongest predictor of accuracy (odds ratio = 3.42; 95% confidence interval: 2.72–4.29; P < .001). Performance improved over time, however, according to cumulative summation analysis, only 7 participants (26.9%) identified adenomas with sufficient sensitivity such that further auditing is not required. CONCLUSIONS With standardized training, gastroenterologists without prior expertise in NBI were able to meet the negative predictive value and surveillance interval thresholds set forth by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The majority of disagreement in surveillance interval brought patients back early. Performance improves with time, but most endoscopists will require ongoing auditing of performance.

The ESS demonstrates fair reliability and validity, with a single factor structure mostly explained by dysphagia. Based on psychometric findings, weight loss and chest pain items may be decreasing ESS reliability and validity. Further assessment of the ESS under FDA guidelines is warranted.

For treatment of PPI unresponsive symptoms in proven GERD, expert esophagologists recommend invasive therapy only in the presence of abnormal reflux burden, with or without hiatal hernia, or regurgitation with positive symptom-reflux association and a large hiatus hernia. Non-invasive pharmacologic or behavioral therapies are preferred for all other scenarios.

Abnormal esophageal acid exposure was associated with an impaired contractile response to volume distention of the esophagus. This supports that acid exposure is dependent on acid clearance mechanisms.

Objective We aimed to evaluate the value of novel high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) metrics, bolus flow time (BFT) and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) contractile integral (CI), as well as EGJ pressure (EGJP) and the integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), as indicators of treatment response in achalasia. Design We prospectively evaluated 75 patients (ages 19–81, 32 female) with achalasia during follow-up after pneumatic dilation or myotomy with Eckardt score (ES), timed-barium esophagram (TBE), and HRIM. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves for good symptomatic outcome (ES ≤ 3) and good radiographic outcome (TBE column height at 5 minutes < 5 cm) were generated for each potential predictor of treatment response (EGJP, IRP, BFT, and EGJ-CI). Results Follow-up occurred at a median (range) 12 (3 – 291) months following treatment. 49 patients had good symptomatic outcome and 46 had good radiographic outcome. The area-under-the-curves (AUCs) on the ROC curve for symptomatic outcome were 0.55 (EGJP), 0.62 (IRP), 0.77 (BFT) and 0.56 (EGJ-CI). The AUCs for radiographic outcome were 0.64 (EGJP), 0.48 (IRP), 0.73 (BFT), and 0.65 (EGJ-CI). Optimal cut-points were determined as 11 mmHg (EGJP) 12 mmHg (IRP), zero seconds (BFT), and 30 mmHg•cm (EGJ-CI) that provided sensitivities/specificities of 57%/46% (EGJP), 65%/58% (IRP), 78%/77% (BFT), and 53%/62% (EGJ-CI) to predict symptomatic outcome and 57%/66% (EGJP), 57%/41% (IRP), 76%/69% (BFT), and 57%/66% (EGJ-CI) to predict radiographic outcome. Conclusions BFT, a novel HRIM metric, provided an improved functional assessment over manometric measures of EGJP, IRP, and EGJ-CI at follow-up after achalasia treatment and may help direct clinical management.