Ernesto Fasulo

Background and Objectives: This study aimed to characterize physicians’ knowledge and practice patterns regarding the use of probiotics in the management of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). By examining clinical experiences and barriers to adoption, this research sought to identify critical gaps in practice and establish a foundation for evidence-based improvements in patient care. Materials and Methods: The survey was conducted in accordance with the CROSS (Consensus-based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies) guidelines. Attendees of a medical congress, specifically general practitioners, gastroenterologists, surgeons, and internists with an interest in the clinical significance and therapeutic modulation of the human microbiome, were invited to participate. Participants completed a 38-item, paper-based questionnaire. The instrument assessed respondents’ self-perceived knowledge of probiotics, their understanding of probiotic definitions and specific strains, and their current clinical practice patterns—particularly regarding the management of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Additionally, the survey explored information sources, the frequency of self-prescription, and the perceived need for further education, with a specific focus on safety profiles and clinical concerns. Results: Of the 70 invited attendees, 68 completed the survey, yielding a response rate of 97.1%. The respondent cohort included 40 general practitioners (GPs), 20 gastroenterologists (GEs), four surgeons (SSs), and four internists (SIMs). More than half of the respondents were female (n = 37, 54.4%), with a median age of 43 years (range: 28–70). Exactly half of the respondents (n = 34, 50.0%) agreed that probiotics always have a role in the management of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS); however, only 44.1% (n = 30) reported familiarity with the relevant scientific literature on probiotics. Furthermore, respondents more frequently recognized bacterial species associated with single-strain probiotic formulations compared to those in multi-strain mixtures. The primary concern regarding the administration of probiotics for IBS was this lack of familiarity with the scientific literature, cited by 23.5% of respondents. Notably, 100% of the surveyed cohort expressed a need for further education on the topic. Conclusions: The emergence of scientific and clinical evidence results in a clinical practice characterized by high prescribing habits, despite the lack of formal approval. These findings highlight evidence showing the effectiveness of certain probiotic strains in managing IBS symptoms, suggesting the need for standardized guidelines. Given the demonstrated need for further education among the surveyed cohort, integrating probiotic-specific training into both undergraduate medical curricula and continuing professional development programs could significantly enhance the clinical knowledge and awareness of both current and future practitioners.

While colonoscopy remains the gold standard for colorectal neoplasia screening and therapeutic resection, its clinical efficacy is often compromised by significant interoperator variability in adenoma detection rates (ADR) and characterization precision. To address these disparities, Artificial intelligence (AI) systems – specifically deep learning-based computer-aided detection (CADe) and computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) – have been integrated into clinical practice to augment endoscopic performance through enhanced lesion recognition and real-time optical biopsy. This review synthesizes evidence from randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and clinical guidelines up to 2025 to evaluate the interplay between endoscopist expertise and AI assistance. Current data indicate that AI-augmented colonoscopy significantly optimizes ADR and the detection of diminutive or nonpolypoid lesions. Furthermore, CADx frameworks demonstrate robust accuracy in predicting real-time histology, potentially facilitating “resect-and-discard” strategies. However, widespread implementation is currently hindered by algorithmic biases, variable external validity, false-positive rates, and unresolved medicolegal implications. Ultimately, AI serves as a potent diagnostic adjunct that reduces operator dependency. Optimal clinical outcomes depend on a synergistic integration of seasoned endoscopic judgment and validated AI algorithms, supported by standardized training and transparent regulatory frameworks.

Background and Aim: We present the first experience with the submucosal injection‐guided septotomy (SING) technique, which integrates the principles of flexible endoscopic septotomy with submucosal endoscopy, applied in different phases of the procedure for the treatment of Zenker's diverticulum (ZD). Methods: Prospectively collected data from consecutive ZD patients treated with SING at three Italian centers (October 2019–August 2024) were analyzed. The primary outcome was clinical success (CS; Kothari‐Haber Score < 2 at 3 months), whereas secondary outcomes included technical success (TS), procedural time, adverse events (AEs), hospital stay, and time to recurrence (Kaplan–Meier method). We also performed subgroup analysis according to ZD dimension (large vs. small) and to soft diverticuloscope use. Results: A total of 102 patients underwent SING (median age 74 years [IQR 68–81]; 69.7% male). Median diverticulum depth was 30 mm (IQR 25–40) and baseline KHS score 4 (IQR 3–6). CS was achieved in 98% (95% CI 93.6%–99.8%), with 7% (95% CI 2.9%–13.9%) experiencing symptom recurrence over a median follow‐up of 370 days (IQR 297–747). Recurrence‐free probabilities were 93.5% at 6 months, 92.0% at 12 months, and 92.0% at 24 months. TS was 100%, median procedural time 30 min (IQR 25–45), and AEs occurred in 3 patients (2.9%), all managed endoscopically. Conclusions: SING is a safe and effective endoscopic treatment for ZD. Prospective comparative studies with standard techniques are warranted.

Introduction: Non‐anesthesiologist‐administered propofol (NAAP) sedation for outpatient endoscopy has proven to be safe. However, implementing NAAP in Western countries faces challenges, and propofol‐based sedation is still largely administered by anesthetists. For low‐risk patients, anesthesiologist‐administered propofol (AAP) could represent an avoidable waste of healthcare resources. Methods: This research consisted of two phases. The first is a retrospective study comparing NAAP and AAP for outpatient endoscopy at a tertiary center, with the primary outcome being the rate of adverse events (AEs). Propensity score matching was performed to balance baseline characteristics between the two groups. The second phase involved a budget impact model to assess the economic impact of using NAAP instead of AAP for low‐risk patients, both locally and nationally, between 2023 and 2025. Results: Between May 2019 and November 2021, 2721 patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs; NAAP 2439 and AAP 282) and 2748 colonoscopies (NAAP 2491 and AAP 257) were enrolled. Overall, the AE rates were similar between the cohorts (esophagogastroduodenoscopies: NAAP 1.1% vs. AAP 0.8%, p = 0.81; colonoscopies: NAAP 1.8% vs. AAP 3.5%, p = 0.20). All NAAP‐related AEs were minor. The budget impact model revealed that adopting NAAP instead of AAP would save €124,724,659 and 2223 working days for healthcare professionals for the Italian National Health System (NHS) between 2023 and 2025. Conclusion: NAAP has a comparable AE rate to AAP for low‐risk outpatient endoscopy. Implementing NAAP instead of AAP could save over €100 million and 2000 working days for the Italian NHS between 2023 and 2025. Wider adoption could improve healthcare resource allocation.

Molecular endoscopy represents a transformative advance in the detection, diagnosis, and management of gastrointestinal diseases, addressing the critical limitations of conventional techniques. Current diagnostic standards, such as white light endoscopy (WLE), often fail to detect early-stage lesions, particularly in high-risk populations like Barrett’s esophagus or inflammatory bowel disease patients. To overcome these challenges, molecular endoscopy, using fluorescent molecular probes, may offer ultimate precision by targeting disease-specific biomarkers. Technologies like Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy (CLE) and Immunoendoscopy are revolutionizing in vivo diagnostics, enabling the real-time visualization of tissue microarchitecture and physiological mechanisms. Fluorescence molecular endoscopy (FME) enhances the detection of precancerous and cancerous lesions, even those undetectable by conventional methods, by highlighting subtle molecular changes. Clinical applications include early tumor detection, therapy response monitoring, and improved lesion characterization. Despite these advancements, challenges persist, including high costs, a lack of standardization, and the need for specialized training. Recent innovations, such as a multi-parametric rigid standard, aim to ensure the reliable performance assessment and quality control of FME systems, addressing subjective variability and improving reproducibility. In addition, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) with molecular endoscopy offers the potential to further reduce detection errors and significantly enhance diagnostic accuracy. This advancement underscores the potential of molecular endoscopy for personalized GI disease management, while highlighting the need for ongoing research to refine the technology, validate its clinical utility, and overcome the barriers to routine clinical application.

Background/Objectives: The management of non-lifting colorectal lesions (NLCLs), often resulting from previous unsuccessful treatments or biopsies, remains challenging due to submucosal fibrosis that prevents adequate lifting. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a viable option for achieving complete resection in such cases. However, when standard ESD is not feasible, conversion to hybrid ESD (H-ESD) has been proposed as a rescue strategy. This study aimed to assess ESD’s feasibility, effectiveness, and safety for NLCLs, including cases requiring conversion to H-ESD, when performed by experienced endoscopists in tertiary referral centers. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective study, data from patients with NLCLs treated by ESD/H-ESD between January 2009 and September 2022 were analyzed. The primary endpoint was the recurrence rate (RR). Secondary endpoints included the adverse event (AE) rate, technical success (TS) rate (en bloc resection regardless of technique), complete resection (CR), curative resection (cR) rates, and surgical intervention rate. Predictors of ESD technical success were identified. Results: In total, 178 patients with NLCLs were included (52 previously biopsied, 126 recurrent after previous resection). ESD was used in 111 (62.4%) and H-ESD in 67 (37.6%) cases. During a median follow-up of 373 days (IQR 540), the overall RR was 3.6%. The overall AE rate was 13.4%, and perforation was the most frequent (8.4%). All AEs were successfully managed endoscopically. The TS rate was 71.9%, significantly higher in previously biopsied lesions compared to recurrent ones (78.8% vs. 55.6%, p = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, rectal location (p < 0.001), F1 fibrosis (p = 0.026), and previously biopsied lesions (p = 0.006) predicted ESD TS without the need for conversion to H-ESD. Conclusions: ESD/H-ESD is feasible and safe for NLCLs when performed by experienced operators, with low RR amenable to endoscopic treatment. Previously biopsied lesions, rectal location, and low fibrosis predict ESD TS.

Anastomotic strictures are a common complication following esophagogastric surgery, with prevalence varying depending on the type of surgery and anatomical site. These strictures can lead to debilitating symptoms such as dysphagia, pain, and malabsorption, significantly impacting patients’ quality of life. Endoscopic treatment of anastomotic strictures has established a role as the first-line strategy in this setting instead of revision surgery, offering benefits in terms of lower morbidity. Various endoscopic methods are available for anastomotic stricture management, including balloon dilation, stent placement, the new lumen-apposing metal stent, and endoscopic incision techniques. However, there is currently no strong evidence and established guidelines for the optimal treatment strategy. Available data suggest that endoscopic treatments, when performed in tertiary referral centers, can provide favorable outcomes in terms of symptom relief and reduced need for rescue surgical intervention. Nonetheless, challenges remain regarding the management of recurrent strictures and procedural complications, underscoring the need for a personalized, multidisciplinary approach to optimize clinical outcomes. This review aims to provide an updated overview of endoscopic techniques and available evidence with a focus on the most recent technologies, supporting clinicians in effectively managing anastomotic strictures in complex clinical settings.

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) face an elevated risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC). Endoscopic surveillance is a cornerstone in CRC prevention, enabling early detection and intervention. However, despite recent advancements, challenges persist. Chromoendoscopy (CE), considered the gold standard for dysplasia detection, remains underutilized due to logistical constraints, prolonged procedural times, and the need for specialized training. New technologies, such as endomicroscopy, confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), and molecular endoscopy (ME), promise unprecedented precision in lesion characterization but are limited to specialized centers. Artificial intelligence (AI) can transform the field; however, barriers to widespread AI adoption include the need for robust datasets, real-time video integration, and seamless incorporation into existing workflows. Beyond technology, patient adherence to surveillance protocols, including bowel preparation and repeat procedures, remains a critical hurdle. This review aims to explore the advancements, ongoing challenges, and future prospects in CRC prevention for IBD patients, focusing on improving outcomes and expanding the implementation of advanced surveillance technologies.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided interventions have revolutionized the management of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), providing minimally invasive alternatives with improved outcomes. These procedures have significantly reduced the need for high-risk surgical interventions or percutaneous alternatives and have provided effective palliative care for patients with advanced gastrointestinal and bilio-pancreatic malignancies. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) techniques, including hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), and antegrade stenting (EUS-AS), offer high technical and clinical success rates, with a good safety profile particularly when Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is not feasible. EUS-HGS, which allows biliary drainage by trans-gastric route, is primarily used for proximal stenosis or in case of surgically altered anatomy; EUS-CDS with Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent (LAMS) for distal MBO (dMBO), EUS-AS as an alternative of EUS-HGS in the bridge-to-surgery scenario or when retrograde access is not possible and EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) with LAMS in case of dMBO with cystic duct patent without dilation of common bile duct (CDB). EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) has already established its role as an effective alternative to surgical GE and enteral self-expandable metal stent, providing relief from GOO with fewer complications and faster recovery times. However, we do not yet have strong evidence on how to combine the different EUS-guided drainage techniques with EUS-GE in the setting of double obstruction. This comprehensive review aims to synthesize growing evidence on this topic by randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case series not only to summarize the efficacy, safety, and technical aspects of these procedures but also to propose a treatment algorithm based essentially on the anatomy and stage of the neoplasm to guide clinical decision-making, incorporating the principles of personalized medicine. This review also highlights the transformative impact of EUS-guided interventions on the treatment landscape for MBO and GOO. These techniques offer safer and more effective options than traditional approaches, with the potential for widespread clinical adoption. Further research is needed to refine these procedures, expand their applications, and improve patient care and quality of life.