IU Indianapolis ScholarWorks :: Browsing by Author "Kessler, William R."

Browsing by Author "Kessler, William R."

Now showing 1 - 9 of 9

A comparison of 2 distal attachment mucosal exposure devices: a noninferiority randomized controlled trial
(Elsevier, 2019) Rex, Douglas K.; Sagi, Sashidhar V.; Kessler, William R.; Rogers, Nicholas A.; Fischer, Monika; Bohm, Matthew E.; Dewitt, John M.; Lahr, Rachel E.; Searight, Meghan P.; Sullivan, Andrew W.; McWhinney, Connor D.; Garcia, Jonathan R.; Broadley, Heather M.; Vemulapalli, Krishna C.; Medicine, School of Medicine
Background and Aims Endocuff and Endocuff Vision are effective mucosal exposure devices for improving polyp detection during colonoscopy. AmplifEYE is a knock-off device that appears similar to the Endocuff devices but has received minimal clinical testing. Methods We performed a randomized controlled clinical trial using a noninferiority design to compare Endocuff Vision with AmplifEYE. Results The primary endpoint of adenomas per colonoscopy was similar in AmplifEYE at 1.63 (2.83) versus 1.51 (2.29) with Endocuff Vision; p=0.535. The 95% lower confidence limit was 0.88 for ratio of means, establishing noninferiority of AmplifEYE (p=0.008). There was no difference between the arms in mean insertion time, and mean inspection time (withdrawal time minus polypectomy time and time for washing and suctioning) was shorter with AmplifEYE (6.8 minutes vs 6.9 minutes, p=0.042). Conclusions AmplifEYE is noninferior to Endocuff Vision for adenoma detection. The decision of which device to use can be based on cost. Additional comparisons of AmplifEYE to Endocuff by other investigators are warranted.
Development of a Multidisciplinary Program to Expedite Care of Esophageal Emergencies
(Elsevier, 2017-09) Ceppa, DuyKhanh P.; Rosati, Carlo Maria; Chabtini, Lola; Stokes, Samantha M.; Cook, Holly C.; Rieger, Karen M.; Birdas, Thomas J.; Lappas, John C.; Kessler, William R.; DeWitt, John M.; Maglinte, Dean D.; Kesler, Kenneth A.; Surgery, School of Medicine
Background Level 1 programs have improved outcomes by expediting the multidisciplinary care of critically ill patients. We established a novel level 1 program for the management of esophageal emergencies. Methods After institutional review board approval, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients referred to our level 1 esophageal emergency program from April 2013 through November 2015. A historical comparison group of patients treated for the same diagnosis in the previous 2 years was used. Results Eighty patients were referred and transported an average distance of 56 miles (range, 1–163 miles). Median time from referral to arrival was 2.4 hours (range, 0.4-12.9 hours). Referrals included 6 (7%) patients with esophageal obstruction and 71 (89%) patients with suspected esophageal perforation. Of the patients with suspected esophageal perforation, causes included iatrogenic (n = 26), Boerhaave’s syndrome (n = 32), and other (n = 13). Forty-six percent (n = 33) of patients were referred because of pneumomediastinum, but perforation could not be subsequently demonstrated. Initial management of patients with documented esophageal perforation included operative treatment (n = 25), endoscopic intervention (n = 8), and supportive care (n = 5). Retrospective analysis demonstrated a statistically significant difference in mean Pittsburgh severity index score (PSS) between esophageal perforation treatment groups (p < 0.01). In patients with confirmed perforations, there were 3 (8%) mortalities within 30 days. More patients in the esophageal level 1 program were transferred to our institution in less than 24 hours after diagnosis than in the historical comparison group (p < 0.01). Conclusions Development of an esophageal emergency referral program has facilitated multidisciplinary care at a high-volume institution, and early outcomes appear favorable.
Endoscopic anterior fundoplication with the Medigus Ultrasonic Surgical Endostapler (MUSE™) for gastroesophageal reflux disease: 6-month results from a multi-center prospective trial
(Springer, 2015-01) Zacherl, Johannes; Roy-Shapira, Aviel; Bonavina, Luigi; Bapaye, Amol; Kiesslich, Ralf; Schoppmann, Sebastian F.; Kessler, William R.; Selzer, Don J.; Broderick, Ryan C.; Lehman, Glen A.; Horgan, Santiago; Department of Medicine, IU School of Medicine
BACKGROUND: Both long-term proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and surgical fundoplication have potential drawbacks as treatments for chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This multi-center, prospective study evaluated the clinical experiences of 69 patients who received an alternative treatment: endoscopic anterior fundoplication with a video- and ultrasound-guided transoral surgical stapler. METHODS: Patients with well-categorized GERD were enrolled at six international sites. Efficacy data was compared at baseline and at 6 months post-procedure. The primary endpoint was a ≥ 50 % improvement in GERD health-related quality of life (HRQL) score. Secondary endpoints were elimination or ≥ 50 % reduction in dose of PPI medication and reduction of total acid exposure on esophageal pH probe monitoring. A safety evaluation was performed at time 0 and weeks 1, 4, 12, and 6 months. RESULTS: 66 patients completed follow-up. Six months after the procedure, the GERD-HRQL score improved by >50 % off PPI in 73 % (48/66) of patients (95 % CI 60-83 %). Forty-two patients (64.6 %) were no longer using daily PPI medication. Of the 23 patients who continued to take PPI following the procedure, 13 (56.5 %) reported a ≥ 50 % reduction in dose. The mean percent of total time with esophageal pH <4.0 decreased from baseline to 6 months (P < 0.001). Common adverse events were peri-operative chest discomfort and sore throat. Two severe adverse events requiring intervention occurred in the first 24 subjects, no further esophageal injury or leaks were reported in the remaining 48 enrolled subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The initial 6-month data reported in this study demonstrate safety and efficacy of this endoscopic plication device. Early experience with the device necessitated procedure and device changes to improve safety, with improved results in the later portion of the study. Continued assessment of durability and safety are ongoing in a three-year follow-up study of this patient group.
Evaluation of timed barium esophagram after per-oral endoscopic myotomy to predict clinical response
(Thieme, 2021-11-12) DeWitt, John M.; Siwiec, Robert M.; Perkins, Anthony; Baik, Daniel; Kessler, William R.; Nowak, Thomas V.; Wo, John M.; James-Stevenson, Toyia; Mendez, Martha; Dickson, Destenee; Stainko, Sarah; Akisik, Fatih; Lappas, John; Al-Haddad, Mohammad A.; Medicine, School of Medicine
Background and study aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether timed barium esophagram within 24 hours post-per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) (TBE-PP) could predict clinical outcomes. Patients and methods: This was a single-center retrospective study of prospectively collected data on consecutive patients with ≥ 6-month follow-up who underwent POEM followed by TBE-PP. Esophageal contrast retention 2 minutes after TBE-PP was assessed as Grade 1 (< 10 %), 2 (10 %-49 %), 3 (50 %-89 %) or 4 (> 90 %). Eckardt score, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), high-resolution manometry (HRM) and function lumen imaging probe (FLIP) of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) were obtained at baseline. These tests along with pH testing of antisecretory therapy were repeated 6 and 24 months after POEM. Clinical response by Eckardt score ≤ 3, EGJ-distensibility index (EGJ-DI) > 2.8 mm 2 /mm Hg, and integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) < 15 mm Hg and incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were compared by transit time. Results: Of 181 patients (58 % male, mean 53 ± 17 yr), TBE-PP was classified as Grade 1 in 122 (67.4 %), Grade 2 in 41 (22.7 %), Grade 3 in 14 (7.7 %) and Grade 4 in 4 (2.2 %). At 6 months, overall clinical response by ES (91.7 %), IRP (86.6 %), EGJ-DI (95.7 %) and the diagnosis of GERD (68.6 %) was similar between Grade 1 and Grade 2-4 TBE-PP. At 24 months, Grade 1 had a higher frequency of a normal IRP compared to Grades 2-4 (95.7 % vs. 60 %, P = 0.021) but overall response by ES (91.2 %), EGJ-DI (92.3 %) and the diagnosis of GERD (74.3 %) were similar. Conclusions: Contrast emptying rate by esophagram after POEM has limited utility to predict clinical response or risk of post-procedure GERD.
Impact of a ring fitted cap on insertion time and adenoma detection: a randomized controlled trial
(Elsevier, 2019) Rex, Douglas K.; Kessler, William R.; Sagi, Sashidhar V.; Rogers, Nicholas A.; Fischer, Monika; Bohm, Matthew E.; Wo, John M.; Dewitt, John M.; McHenry, Lee; Lahr, Rachel E.; Searight, Meghan P.; MacPhail, Margaret; Sullivan, Andrew W.; McWhinney, Connor D.; Vemulapalli, Krishna C.; Medicine, School of Medicine
Background and Aims: Devices for flattening colon folds can improve polyp detection at colonoscopy. However, there are few data on the endoscopic ring fitted cap (EndoRings, EndoAid, Caesarea, Israel). We sought to compare adenoma detection with EndoRings with that of standard high-definition colonoscopy. Methods: A single-center randomized controlled trial of 562 patients (284 randomized to EndoRings and 278 to standard colonoscopy) at 2 outpatient endoscopy units in the Indiana University Hospital system. Adenoma detection was the primary outcome measured as adenoma detection rate (ADR) and adenomas per colonoscopy (APC). We also compared sessile serrated polyp detection rate (SSPDR), insertion times, withdrawal times, and ease of passage through the sigmoid colon. Results: EndoRings was superior to standard colonoscopy in terms of APC (1.46 vs 1.06, p=0.025) but there were no statistically significant differences in ADR or SSPDR. Mean withdrawal time (in patients with no polyps) was shorter and insertion time (all patients) was longer in the EndoRings arm by 1.8 minutes and 0.75 minutes, respectively. One provider had significantly higher detection with EndoRings and contributed substantially to the overall results. Conclusions: EndoRings can increase adenoma detection without significant increase in procedure time, but the effect varies between operators. EndoRings slows colonoscope insertion.
Impact of the development of an endoscopic eradication program for Barrett's esophagus with high grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma on the frequency of surgery
(Thieme, 2018-09) Chilukuri, Prianka; Gromski, Mark A.; Johnson, Cynthia S.; Ceppa, Duy Khanh P.; Kesler, Kenneth A.; Birdas, Thomas J.; Rieger, Karen M.; Fatima, Hala; Kessler, William R.; Rex, Douglas K.; Al-Haddad, Mohammad; DeWitt, John M.; Medicine, School of Medicine
Background and aims The impact of the advent of an institutional endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) program on surgical practice for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated high grade dysplasia (HGD) or suspected T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is unknown. The aims of this study are to evaluate the different endoscopic modalities used during development of our EET program and factors associated with the use of EET or surgery for these patients after its development. Methods Patients who underwent primary endoscopic or surgical treatment for BE-HGD or early EAC at our hospital between January 1992 and December 2014 were retrospectively identified. They were categorized by their initial modality of treatment during the first year, and the impact over time for choice of therapy was assessed by multivariable logistic regression. Results We identified 386 patients and 80 patients who underwent EET and surgery, respectively. EET included single modality therapy in 254 (66 %) patients and multimodal therapy in 132 (34 %) patients. Multivariable logistic regression showed that, for each subsequent study year, EET was more likely to be performed in patients who were older ( P = 0.0009), with shorter BE lengths ( P < 0.0001), and with a pretreatment diagnosis of HGD ( P = 0.0054) compared to surgical patients. The diagnosis of EAC did not increase the utilization of EET compared to surgery as time progressed ( P = 0.8165). Conclusion The introduction of an EET program at our hospital increased the odds of utilizing EET versus surgery over time for initial treatment of patients who were older, had shorter BE lengths or the diagnosis of BE-HGD, but not in patients with EAC.
Long-term follow-up results of endoscopic treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease with the MUSE TM endoscopic stapling device
(Springer, 2015) Kim, Hong Joo; Kwon, Chang-Il; Kessler, William R.; Selzer, Don J.; McNulty, Gail; Bapaye, Amol; Bonavina, Luigi; Lehman, Glen A.; Department of Medicine, IU School of Medicine
Background The initial 6-month data for MUSE™ (Medigus, Omer, Israel) endoscopic stapling device were reported (Zacherl et al. in Surg Endosc 29:220–229, 2015). The current study aims to evaluate the long-term clinical outcome of 37 patients who received endoscopic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) treatment with the MUSE™ device. Methods Efficacy and safety data for 37 patients were analyzed at baseline, 6 months, and 4 years post-procedure. In one center (IU), efficacy and safety data were evaluated at baseline, 6 months post-procedure, and then annually up to 4 years. Results No new complications have been reported in our long-term analysis. The proportions of patients who remained off daily PPI were 83.8 % (31/37) at 6 months and 69.4 % (25/36) at 4 years post-procedure. GERD-Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) scores (off PPI) were significantly decreased from baseline to 6 months and 4 years post-procedure. The daily dosage of GERD medications, measured as omeprazole equivalents (mean ± SD, mg), decreased from 66.1 ± 33.2 at baseline to 10.8 ± 15.9 at 6 months and 12.8 ± 19.4 at 4 years post-procedure (P < 0.01). Conclusions In our multi-center prospective study, the MUSE™ stapling device appears to be safe and effective in improving symptom scores as well as reducing PPI use in patients with GERD. These results appeared to be equal to or better than those of the other devices for endoluminal GERD therapy. Future studies with larger patient series, sham control group, and greater number of staples are awaited.
Long-term follow-up results of endoscopic treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease with the MUSE™ endoscopic stapling device
(Springer, 2016-08) Kim, Hong Joo; Kwon, Chang-Il; Kessler, William R.; Selzer, Don J.; McNulty, Gail; Bapaye, Amol; Bonavina, Luigi; Lehman, Glen A.; Department of Medicine, IU School of Medicine
BACKGROUND: The initial 6-month data for MUSE™ (Medigus, Omer, Israel) endoscopic stapling device were reported (Zacherl et al. in Surg Endosc 29:220-229, 2015). The current study aims to evaluate the long-term clinical outcome of 37 patients who received endoscopic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) treatment with the MUSE™ device. METHODS: Efficacy and safety data for 37 patients were analyzed at baseline, 6 months, and 4 years post-procedure. In one center (IU), efficacy and safety data were evaluated at baseline, 6 months post-procedure, and then annually up to 4 years. RESULTS: No new complications have been reported in our long-term analysis. The proportions of patients who remained off daily PPI were 83.8 % (31/37) at 6 months and 69.4 % (25/36) at 4 years post-procedure. GERD-Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) scores (off PPI) were significantly decreased from baseline to 6 months and 4 years post-procedure. The daily dosage of GERD medications, measured as omeprazole equivalents (mean ± SD, mg), decreased from 66.1 ± 33.2 at baseline to 10.8 ± 15.9 at 6 months and 12.8 ± 19.4 at 4 years post-procedure (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In our multi-center prospective study, the MUSE™ stapling device appears to be safe and effective in improving symptom scores as well as reducing PPI use in patients with GERD. These results appeared to be equal to or better than those of the other devices for endoluminal GERD therapy. Future studies with larger patient series, sham control group, and greater number of staples are awaited.
Narrow-band imaging versus white light for the detection of proximal colon serrated lesions: a randomized, controlled trial
(Elsevier, 2016-01) Rex, Douglas K.; Clodfelter, Ryan; Rahmani, Farrah; Fatima, Hala; James-Stevenson, Toyia N.; Tang, John C.; Kim, Hak Nam; McHenry, Lee; Kahi, Charles J.; Rogers, Nicholas A.; Helper, Debra J.; Sagi, Sashidhar V.; Kessler, William R.; Wo, John M.; Fischer, Monika; Kwo, Paul Y.; Department of Medicine, School of Medicine
Background The value of narrow-band imaging (NBI) for detecting serrated lesions is unknown. Objective To assess NBI for the detection of proximal colon serrated lesions. Design Randomized, controlled trial. Setting Two academic hospital outpatient units. Patients Eight hundred outpatients 50 years of age and older with intact colons undergoing routine screening, surveillance, or diagnostic examinations. Interventions Randomization to colon inspection in NBI versus white-light colonoscopy. Main Outcome Measurements The number of serrated lesions (sessile serrated polyps plus hyperplastic polyps) proximal to the sigmoid colon. Results The mean inspection times for the whole colon and proximal colon were the same for the NBI and white-light groups. There were 204 proximal colon lesions in the NBI group and 158 in the white light group (P = .085). Detection of conventional adenomas was comparable in the 2 groups. Limitations Lack of blinding, endoscopic estimation of polyp location. Conclusion NBI may increase the detection of proximal colon serrated lesions, but the result in this trial did not reach significance. Additional study of this issue is warranted. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01572428.)

Browsing by Author "Kessler, William R."

Results Per Page

Sort Options