Displaying publications 1 - 20 of 48 in total

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Ho JCL, Lui RN, Ho SH, Hock NTC, Luo X, Tang RSY, et al.
    J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2024 Jan;39(1):133-140.
    PMID: 37967819 DOI: 10.1111/jgh.16409
    BACKGROUND AND AIM: Greenhouse gas emissions are the fundamental cause of global warming, with CO2 being the most contributive. Carbon reduction has been widely advocated to mitigate the climate crisis. The endoscopy unit is the third highest waste-generating department in a hospital. The awareness and acceptance of the practice of green endoscopy among healthcare workers is unclear.

    METHOD: An online survey was conducted over a 5-week period from July to August 2023 in the Asia-Pacific region, which targeted endoscopists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals of the endoscopy unit. The primary outcome was the agreement to adopt green endoscopy. The secondary outcomes included views on sustainable practices, factors associated with increased acceptance of green endoscopy, the acceptance of different carbon reduction measures, and the perceived barriers to implementation.

    RESULTS: A total of 259 valid responses were received. Overall, 79.5% of participants agreed to incorporate green endoscopy into their practice. Nevertheless, existing green policies were only reported by 12.7% of respondents. The level of understanding of green endoscopy is the only significant factor associated with its acceptance (odds ratio 3.10, P 

    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal*
  2. Nik Affendi NA, Hilmi I
    J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2024 May;39(5):779-780.
    PMID: 38400711 DOI: 10.1111/jgh.16522
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal
  3. Goh KL
    Dig Endosc, 2011 May;23 Suppl 1:150-3.
    PMID: 21535222 DOI: 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2011.01123.x
    Gastrointestinal endoscopy started in the early 1970s in Malaysia with the help of Japanese doctors. It has evolved over the past 30 years. The gastrointestinal endoscopy unit at the University of Malaya Medical Centre has been in the forefront in providing endoscopy services to patients as well as training doctors in endoscopy in the country. In recent years, trainees have included those from neighboring countries in South-East Asia. Among our most significant achievements is the organization of regular international therapeutic endoscopy workshops since 1993 where leading endoscopists from throughout the world have accepted our invitation as teaching faculty. In 2008, the World Organization of Digestive Endoscopy accorded the high distinction of Centre of Excellence to the endoscopy unit of the University of Malaya Medical Centre.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/history*; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/trends
  4. Wong DN
    Gastrointest Endosc, 1997 Nov;46(5):480-4.
    PMID: 9402137
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/standards; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/statistics & numerical data
  5. Ho SH, Uedo N, Aso A, Shimizu S, Saito Y, Yao K, et al.
    J Clin Gastroenterol, 2018 04;52(4):295-306.
    PMID: 29210900 DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000960
    Endoscopy imaging of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract has evolved tremendously over the last few decades. Key milestones in the development of endoscopy imaging include the use of various dyes for chromoendoscopy, the application of optical magnification in endoscopy, the introduction of high-definition image capturing and display technology and the application of altered illuminating light to achieve vascular and surface enhancement. Aims of this review paper are to summarize the development and evolution of modern endoscopy imaging and in particular, imaged-enhanced endoscopy (IEE), to promote appropriate usage, and to guide future development of good endoscopy practice. A search of PubMed database was performed to identify articles related to IEE of the GI tract. Where appropriate, landmark trials and high-quality meta-analyses and systematic reviews were used in the discussion. In this review, the developments and evolutions in endoscopy imaging and in particular, IEE, were summarized into discernible eras and the literature evidence with regard to the strengths and weaknesses in term of their detection and characterization capability in each of these eras were discussed. It is in the authors' opinion that IEE is capable of fairly good detection and accurate characterization of various GI lesions but such benefits may not be readily reaped by those who are new in the field of luminal endoscopy. Exposure and training in making confident diagnoses using these endoscopy imaging technologies are required in tandem with these new developments in order to fully embrace and adopt the benefits.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/history*; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/instrumentation
  6. Chiu PWY, Uedo N, Singh R, Gotoda T, Ng EKW, Yao K, et al.
    Gut, 2019 02;68(2):186-197.
    PMID: 30420400 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2018-317111
    BACKGROUND: This is a consensus developed by a group of expert endoscopists aiming to standardise the preparation, process and endoscopic procedural steps for diagnosis of early upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancers.

    METHOD: The Delphi method was used to develop consensus statements through identification of clinical questions on diagnostic endoscopy. Three consensus meetings were conducted to consolidate the statements and voting. We conducted a systematic literature search on evidence for each statement. The statements were presented in the second consensus meeting and revised according to comments. The final voting was conducted at the third consensus meeting on the level of evidence and agreement.

    RESULTS: Risk stratification should be conducted before endoscopy and high risk endoscopic findings should raise an index of suspicion. The presence of premalignant mucosal changes should be documented and use of sedation is recommended to enhance detection of superficial upper GI neoplasms. The use of antispasmodics and mucolytics enhanced visualisation of the upper GI tract, and systematic endoscopic mapping should be conducted to improve detection. Sufficient examination time and structured training on diagnosis improves detection. Image enhanced endoscopy in addition to white light imaging improves detection of superficial upper GI cancer. Magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging is recommended for characterisation of upper GI superficial neoplasms. Endoscopic characterisation can avoid unnecessary biopsy.

    CONCLUSION: This consensus provides guidance for the performance of endoscopic diagnosis and characterisation for early gastric and oesophageal neoplasia based on the evidence. This will enhance the quality of endoscopic diagnosis and improve detection of early upper GI cancers.

    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/standards*
  7. Kong SS, Taib NA, Mahadeva S
    BMJ Case Rep, 2009;2009.
    PMID: 21686715 DOI: 10.1136/bcr.08.2008.0628
    Intussusception due to small intestinal polyps in Peutz-Jeghers syndrome represents a significant clinical challenge. Neither pure surgical nor endoscopic approaches alone are effective in the long-term management of this problem. We describe a combined approach using both surgery and small bowel endoscopy in the management of this condition, which resulted in both immediate and long-term success. Although not new, we believe this approach remains relevant despite recent technological advancements in this area.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal
  8. Goh KL
    Ann Acad Med Singap, 2015 Jan;44(1):34-9.
    PMID: 25703498
    Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy has evolved tremendously from the early days when candlelight was used to illuminate scopes to the extent that it has now become an integral part of the practice of modern gastroenterology. The first gastroscope was a rigid scope first introduced by Adolf Kussmaul in 1868. However this scope suffered from the 2 drawbacks of poor illumination and high risk of instrumental perforation. Rudolf Schindler improved on this by inventing the semiflexible gastroscope in 1932. But it was Basil Hirschowitz, using the principle of light conduction in fibreoptics, who allowed us to "see well" for the first time when he invented the flexible gastroscopy in 1958. With amazing speed and innovation, instrument companies, chiefly Japanese, had improved on the Hirschowitz gastroscope and invented a flexible colonoscope. Walter McCune introduced the technique of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in 1968 which has now evolved into a sophisticated procedure. The advent of the digital age in the 1980s saw the invention of the videoendoscope. Videoendoscopes have allowed us to start seeing the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) "better" with high magnification and resolution and optical/digital enhancements. Fusing confocal and light microscopy with endoscopy has allowed us to perform an "optical biopsy" of the GI mucosa. Development of endoscopic ultrasonography has allowed us to see "beyond" the GIT lumen. Seeing better has allowed us to do better. Endoscopists have ventured into newer procedures such as the resection of mucosal and submucosal tumours and the field of therapeutic GI endoscopy sees no end in sight.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal*
  9. Paramasivam RK, Angsuwatcharakon P, Soontornmanokul T, Rerknimitr R
    Dig Endosc, 2013 May;25 Suppl 2:132-6.
    PMID: 23617664 DOI: 10.1111/den.12079
    Management of endoscopic complications is a pertinent aspect of patient care that has received great attention in the past decade due to advancements and increases in complexity of therapeutic endoscopy. Working groups from various institutions such as American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy have devised detailed guidelines and management algorithms. Three main factors that contribute to endoscopic complications are patient, operator, and type of procedure. No one rule suits all;hence endoscopic complication management must be customized to individual patients. Comprehensive knowledge of patient, machine/device, and its interrelationship must be in place to manage endoscopic complications.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/adverse effects*
  10. Hilmi I, Goh KL
    Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2013 Jan;37(1):156-7; discussion 157-8.
    PMID: 23205475 DOI: 10.1111/apt.12122
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods*
  11. Zhiqin W, Muhammad Nawawi KN, Raja Ali RA
    Endoscopy, 2020 08;52(8):704-705.
    PMID: 32722836 DOI: 10.1055/a-1168-6841
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal
  12. Chan FKL, Wong MCS, Chan AT, East JE, Chiu HM, Makharia GK, et al.
    Gut, 2023 Jul;72(7):1240-1254.
    PMID: 37019620 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2023-329429
    Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is effective in reducing CRC related mortality. Current screening methods include endoscopy based and biomarker based approaches. This guideline is a joint official statement of the Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology (APAGE) and the Asian Pacific Society of Digestive Endoscopy (APSDE), developed in response to the increasing use of, and accumulating supportive evidence for the role of, non-invasive biomarkers for the diagnosis of CRC and its precursor lesions. A systematic review of 678 publications and a two stage Delphi consensus process involving 16 clinicians in various disciplines was undertaken to develop 32 evidence based and expert opinion based recommendations for the use of faecal immunochemical tests, faecal based tumour biomarkers or microbial biomarkers, and blood based tumour biomarkers for the detection of CRC and adenoma. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided on indications, patient selection and strengths and limitations of each screening tool. Future research to inform clinical applications are discussed alongside objective measurement of research priorities. This joint APAGE-APSDE practice guideline is intended to provide an up-to-date guide to assist clinicians worldwide in utilising non-invasive biomarkers for CRC screening; it has particular salience for clinicians in the Asia-Pacific region.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal
  13. Jailani RF, Kosai NR, Yaacob NY, Jarmin R, Sutton P, Harunarrashid H, et al.
    Clin Ter, 2014;165(6):294-8.
    PMID: 25524184 DOI: 10.7417/CT.2014.1771
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of transarterial angioembolization (TAE) and surgery with endoscopically unmanageable non-variceal hemorrhage of the upper gastrointestinal tract.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS: A case note review of all patients treated for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding from January 2006 till January 2012 was performed.

    RESULTS: Fifty-four of 667 patients with non-variceal bleeding did not respond to endoscopic treatment. Nine of the 54 patients had incomplete data, leaving 45 patients in the study; 24 had angiography and another 21 had surgery. The two groups were broadly similar in terms of relevant clinical variables. Nineteen of 24 having angiography had embolisation. Re-bleeding recurred in 8 patients (33%) in the TAE group and 6 patients (28.6%) in the surgery group (p = 0.28). There was no statistically significant difference in post procedural complications (81% vs 62.5%, p = 0.17), 30-day mortality (33% vs 29.1%, p = 0.17 ) units of blood transfused (12.24 vs 8.92, p = 0.177) and mean hospital stay (30.7 vs 22.9 days, p = 0.281) observed in patients undergoing surgery as compared to TAE.

    CONCLUSIONS: TAE and surgery have similar outcomes in patients with endoscopically unmanageable non-variceal upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/adverse effects*
  14. Gul YA, Jabar MF, Mo'min N, Hon SK
    Med J Malaysia, 2004 Mar;59(1):65-71.
    PMID: 15535338
    A retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out in a tertiary referral centre to determine the appropriateness of usage of emergency upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EUGIE) with reference to the guidelines set by the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE). EUGIE was defined as early, non-elective endoscopy performed for in-patients within 48 hours of acute hospital admission. The median age of the 668 patients was 55 years (age range 12- 90), 31% of whom had a previous upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Bleeding in the form of haematemesis, melaena or anaemia was the most common indication (40.7%) for EUGIE. Eighty one percent of the procedures were judged appropriate by the ASGE guidelines. There was a statistically significant relationship between appropriateness and significant diagnostic yield (P<0.05). Procedures performed for melaena, symptomatic anaemia and haemetemesis led to greater significant diagnostic yield (P<0.05) and there was no difference in the yield between working-hours and after-hours EUGIE.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/utilization*
  15. Wang CY, Ling LC, Cardosa MS, Wong AK, Wong NW
    Anaesthesia, 2000 Jul;55(7):654-8.
    PMID: 10919420
    In Study A, the incidence of arterial oxygen desaturation was studied using pulse oximetry (SaO2) in 100 sedated and 100 nonsedated patients breathing room air who underwent diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Hypoxia (SaO2 92% or less of at least 15 s duration) occurred in 17% and 6% of sedated patients and nonsedated patients, respectively (p < 0.03). Mild desaturation (SaO2 94% or less and less than 15 s duration) occurred in 47% of sedated patients compared with 12% of nonsedated patients (p < 0.001). In Study B, the effects of supplementary oxygen therapy and the effects of different pre-oxygenation times on arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2) in sedated patients were studied using pulse oximetry. One hundred and twenty patients who underwent diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with intravenous sedation were studied. Patients were randomly allocated to one of four groups: Group A (n = 30) received no supplementary oxygen while Groups B-D received supplementary oxygen at 4 1 x min(-1) via nasal cannulae. The pre-oxygenation time in Group B (n = 30) was zero minutes, Group C (n = 30) was 2 min and Group D (n = 30) was 5 min before sedation and introduction of the endoscope. Hypoxia occurred in seven of the 30 patients in Group A and none in groups B, C and D (p < 0.001). We conclude that desaturation and hypoxia is common in patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with and without sedation. Sedation significantly increases the incidence of desaturation and hypoxia. Supplementary nasal oxygen at 4 1 x min(-1) in sedated patients abolishes desaturation and hypoxia. Pre-oxygenation confers no additional benefit.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/adverse effects*
  16. Chuah SY, Leong CK, Tang CL, Nachiappan M, Pang CW
    Med J Malaysia, 2001 Jun;56(2):257-8.
    PMID: 11771092
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/statistics & numerical data*
  17. Chuah SY
    Med J Malaysia, 1995 Jun;50(2):162-5.
    PMID: 7565187
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal*
  18. Lua GW, Tang J, Liu F, Li ZS
    Dig Dis Sci, 2016 06;61(6):1763-9.
    PMID: 26809870 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-016-4034-4
    BACKGROUND: Esophageal stricture is one of the serious adverse events following endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, optimum preventive techniques are still lacking.

    AIMS: Our primary objective was to evaluate the incidence of post-ESD esophageal stricture with the application of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) sheets. Secondary objectives were to determine the number of sessions of endoscopic balloon dilatation (EBD) required to resolve post-ESD strictures and the incidence rate of peri-operative adverse events.

    METHODS: This was a pilot, single-center, prospective study. Seven patients who had high risks of developing post-ESD esophageal stricture were enrolled into our study. CMC sheets were applied to the mucosal defects immediately after the completion of ESD. Patients were monitored and reviewed after ESD to detect any adverse events.

    RESULTS: The incidence rate of post-operative stricture was 57 % (4/7 patients). Among patients who required EBD, the number of sessions performed was 2.8 ± 2.2. No serious post-operative adverse events were reported.

    CONCLUSION: The use of CMC sheets appears to be a safe and effective prophylactic treatment for esophageal stricture following extensive ESD.

    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/adverse effects*
  19. Sung JJ, Chiu PW, Chan FKL, Lau JY, Goh KL, Ho LH, et al.
    Gut, 2018 10;67(10):1757-1768.
    PMID: 29691276 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2018-316276
    Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains an important emergency condition, leading to significant morbidity and mortality. As endoscopic therapy is the 'gold standard' of management, treatment of these patients can be considered in three stages: pre-endoscopic treatment, endoscopic haemostasis and post-endoscopic management. Since publication of the Asia-Pacific consensus on non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) 7 years ago, there have been significant advancements in the clinical management of patients in all three stages. These include pre-endoscopy risk stratification scores, blood and platelet transfusion, use of proton pump inhibitors; during endoscopy new haemostasis techniques (haemostatic powder spray and over-the-scope clips); and post-endoscopy management by second-look endoscopy and medication strategies. Emerging techniques, including capsule endoscopy and Doppler endoscopic probe in assessing adequacy of endoscopic therapy, and the pre-emptive use of angiographic embolisation, are attracting new attention. An emerging problem is the increasing use of dual antiplatelet agents and direct oral anticoagulants in patients with cardiac and cerebrovascular diseases. Guidelines on the discontinuation and then resumption of these agents in patients presenting with NVUGIB are very much needed. The Asia-Pacific Working Group examined recent evidence and recommends practical management guidelines in this updated consensus statement.
    Matched MeSH terms: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods*
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links