Browsing by Author "Fujii-Lau, Larissa L."

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ASGE Guideline on role of endoscopy in the diagnosis of malignancy in biliary strictures of undetermined etiology: Methodology and Review of Evidence
    (Elsevier, 2023) Fujii-Lau, Larissa L.; Thosani, Nirav C.; Al-Haddad, Mohammad; Acoba, Jared; Wray, Curtis J.; Zvavanjanja, Rodrick; Amateau, Stuart K.; Buxbaum, James L.; Wani, Sachin; Calderwood, Audrey H.; Chalhoub, Jean M.; Coelho-Prabhu, Nayantara; Desai, Madhav; Elhanafi, Sherif E.; Fishman, Douglas S.; Forbes, Nauzer; Jamil, Laith H.; Jue, Terry L.; Kohli, Divyanshoo R.; Kwon, Richard S.; Law, Joanna K.; Lee, Jeffrey K.; Machicado, Jorge D.; Marya, Neil B.; Pawa, Swati; Ruan, Wenly; Sawhney, Mandeep S.; Sheth, Sunil G.; Storm, Andrew; Thiruvengadam, Nikhil R.; Qumseya, Bashar J.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Biliary strictures of undetermined etiology pose a diagnostic challenge for endoscopists. Despite advances in technology, diagnosing malignancy in biliary strictures often requires multiple procedures. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to rigorously review and synthesize the available literature on strategies used to diagnose undetermined biliary strictures. Using a systematic review and meta-analysis of each diagnostic modality, including fluoroscopic-guided biopsies, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration or biopsy, the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Standards of Practice committee provides this guideline on modalities used to diagnose biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document summarizes the methods used in the GRADE analysis to make recommendations, while the "Summary and Recommendations" document contains a concise summary of our findings and final recommendations.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ASGE Guideline on the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis of malignancy in biliary strictures of undetermined etiology: Summary and Recommendations
    (Elsevier, 2023) Fujii-Lau, Larissa L.; Thosani, Nirav C.; Al-Haddad, Mohammad; Acoba, Jared; Wray, Curtis J.; Zvavanjanja, Rodrick; Amateau, Stuart K.; Buxbaum, James L.; Calderwood, Audrey H.; Chalhoub, Jean M.; Coelho-Prabhu, Nayantara; Desai, Madhav; Elhanafi, Sherif E.; Fishman, Douglas S.; Forbes, Nauzer; Jamil, Laith H.; Jue, Terry L.; Kohli, Divyanshoo R.; Kwon, Richard S.; Law, Joanna K.; Lee, Jeffrey K.; Machicado, Jorge D.; Marya, Neil B.; Pawa, Swati; Ruan, Wenly; Sawhney, Mandeep S.; Sheth, Sunil G.; Storm, Andrew; Thiruvengadam, Nikhil R.; Qumseya, Bashar J.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures of undetermined etiology. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework and addresses the role of fluoroscopic-guided biopsies, brush cytology, cholangioscopy, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with biliary strictures. In the endoscopic work-up of these patients, we suggest the use of fluoroscopic-guided biopsies in addition to brush cytology over brush cytology alone, especially for hilar strictures. Especially for patients with, non-diagnostic sampling we suggest the use of cholangioscopic and EUS-guided biopsies; the former for non-distal and the latter for distal strictures or those with suspected spread to surrounding lymph nodes and other structures.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ASGE Guideline on the Role of Ergonomics for Prevention of Endoscopy-related Injury (ERI): Methodology and Review of Evidence
    (ASGE, 2023-10) Pawa, Swati; Kwon, Richard S.; Fishman, Douglas S.; Thosani, Nirav C.; Shergill, Amandeep; Grover , Samir C.; Al-Haddad , Mohammad; Amateau, Stuart K.; Buxbaum , James L.; Calderwood , Audrey H.; Chalhoub, Jean M.; Coelho-Prabhu, Nayantara; Desai, Madhav; Elhanafi, Sherif E.; Forbes, Nauzer; Fujii-Lau, Larissa L.; Kohli, Divyanshoo R.; Machicado , Jorge D.; Marya, Neil B.; Ruan, Wenly; Sheth, Sunil G.; Storm, Andrew C.; Thiruvengadam, Nikhil R.; Wani, Sachin; Qumseya, Bashar J.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    This guideline document was prepared by the Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy using the best available scientific evidence and considering a multitude of variables including but not limited to adverse events, patient values, and cost implications. The purpose of these guidelines is to provide the best practice recommendations, which may help standardize patient care, improve patient outcomes, and reduce variability in practice. We recognize that clinical decision-making is complex. Guidelines, therefore, are not a substitute for a clinician’s judgment. Such judgements may at times seem contradictory to our guidance because of many factors that are impossible to fully consider by guideline developers. Any clinical decisions should be based on the clinician’s experience, local expertise, resource availability, and patient values and preferences. This document is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating for, mandating, or discouraging any particular treatment. Our guidelines should not be used in support of medical complaints, legal proceedings, and/or litigation, as they were not designed for this purpose.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ASGE Guideline on the Role of Ergonomics for Prevention of Endoscopy-related Injury (ERI): Summary and Recommendations
    (ASGE, 2023-10) Pawa, Swati; Kwon, Richard S.; Fishman, Douglas S.; Thosani, Nirav C.; Shergill, Amandeep; Grover , Samir C.; Al-Haddad, Mohammad; Amateau, Stuart K.; Buxbaum, James L.; Calderwood , Audrey H.; Chalhoub, Jean M.; Coelho-Prabhu, Nayantara; Desai, Madhav; Elhanafi, Sherif E.; Forbes , Nauzer; Fujii-Lau, Larissa L.; Kohli , Divyanshoo R.; Machicado, Jorge D.; Marya, Neil B.; Ruan, Wenly; Sheth, Sunil G.; Storm, Andrew C.; Thiruvengadam, Nikhil R.; Qumseya, Bashar J.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach to strategies to prevent endoscopy-related injury (ERI) in GI endoscopists. It is accompanied by the article subtitled “Methodology and Review of Evidence,” which provides a detailed account of the methodology used for the evidence review. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline estimates the rates, sites, and predictors of ERI. Additionally, it addresses the role of ergonomics training, microbreaks and macrobreaks, monitor and table positions, antifatigue mats, and use of ancillary devices in decreasing the risk of ERI. We recommend formal ergonomics education and neutral posture during the performance of endoscopy, achieved through adjustable monitor and optimal procedure table position, to reduce the risk of ERI. We suggest taking microbreaks and scheduled macrobreaks and using antifatigue mats during procedures to prevent ERI. We suggest the use of ancillary devices in those with risk factors predisposing them to ERI.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    EUS-derived criteria for distinguishing benign from malignant metastatic solid hepatic masses
    (Elsevier, 2015-05) Fujii-Lau, Larissa L.; Abu Dayyeh, Barham K.; Bruno, Marco J.; Chang, Kenneth J.; DeWitt, John M.; Fockens, Paul; Forcione, David; Napoleon, Bertrand; Palazzo, Laurent; Topazian, Mark D.; Wiersema, Maurits J.; Chak, Amitabh; Clain, Jonathan E.; Faigel, Douglas O.; Gleeson, Ferga C.; Hawes, Robert; Iyer, Prasad G.; Rajan, Elizabeth; Stevens, Tyler; Wallace, Michael B.; Wang, Kenneth K.; Levy, Michael J.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background Detection of hepatic metastases during EUS is an important component of tumor staging. Objective To describe our experience with EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) of solid hepatic masses and derive and validate criteria to help distinguish between benign and malignant hepatic masses. Design Retrospective study, survey. Setting Single, tertiary-care referral center. Patients Medical records were reviewed for all patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid hepatic masses over a 12-year period. Interventions EUS-FNA of solid hepatic masses. Main Outcome Measurements Masses were deemed benign or malignant according to predetermined criteria. EUS images from 200 patients were used to create derivation and validation cohorts of 100 cases each, matched by cytopathologic diagnosis. Ten expert endosonographers blindly rated 15 initial endosonographic features of each of the 100 images in the derivation cohort. These data were used to derive an EUS scoring system that was then validated by using the validation cohort by the expert endosonographer with the highest diagnostic accuracy. Results A total of 332 patients underwent EUS-FNA of a hepatic mass. Interobserver agreement regarding the initial endosonographic features among the expert endosonographers was fair to moderate, with a mean diagnostic accuracy of 73% (standard deviation 5.6). A scoring system incorporating 7 EUS features was developed to distinguish benign from malignant hepatic masses by using the derivation cohort with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.92; when applied to the validation cohort, performance was similar (AUC 0.86). The combined positive predictive value of both cohorts was 88%. Limitations Single center, retrospective, only one expert endosonographer deriving and validating the EUS criteria. Conclusion An EUS scoring system was developed that helps distinguish benign from malignant hepatic masses. Further study is required to determine the impact of these EUS criteria among endosonographers of all experience.