Bio

Clinical Focus


  • Complex endoscopic procedures
  • Gastroenterology

Academic Appointments


Administrative Appointments


  • Director of Endoscopy, Stanford University School of Medicine (2010 - Present)
  • Co-Director of Endoscopy, Stanford University School of Medicine (2009 - 2010)
  • Director of Biliary Endoscopy, Stanford University School of Medicine (2001 - 2009)
  • Program Director, Advanced Endoscopy Fellowship Program, Stanford University School of Medicine (2010 - Present)
  • Co-Chair, Technology Committee, American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (2013 - Present)
  • Chair, Annual Scientific Program Committee (ERCP Section), American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (2012 - 2013)
  • Member, Standards of Practice Committee, American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (2006 - 2009)
  • Member, Technology Committee, American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (2009 - 2013)
  • Member, Annual Scientific Program Committee (ERCP Section), American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (2009 - 2013)

Honors & Awards


  • Certificate of Appreciation, Stanford Biodesign (June 2009)
  • Fellowship Teaching Award, Division of Gastroenterology (2008)

Professional Education


  • Fellowship:Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Harvard Medical School (2001) MA
  • Medical Education:Armed Forces Medical College (1993) India
  • Internship:Cleveland Clinic Foundation (1997) OH
  • Residency:Cleveland Clinic Foundation (1998) OH
  • Board Certification: Gastroenterology, American Board of Internal Medicine (2000)
  • Fellowship, Beth Israel Med Ctr, Harvard University, Advanced Therapeutic Endoscopy (2001)
  • Fellowship, Beth Israel Med Ctr, Harvard University, Gastroenterology (2000)

Research & Scholarship

Current Research and Scholarly Interests


Dr. Banerjee is the Director of Endoscopy at the Stanford University Medical Center. His research interests include evaluation of advanced endoscopic procedures (ERCP, choledochoscopy and endoscopic ultrasound) in the diagnosis and management of benign and malignant pancreatic and biliary disease. Additional interests include the development of new endoscopic devices and instruments.

Publications

Journal Articles


  • Root cause analysis of gastroduodenal ulceration after yttrium-90 radioembolization. Cardiovascular and interventional radiology Lam, M. G., Banerjee, S., Louie, J. D., Abdelmaksoud, M. H., Iagaru, A. H., Ennen, R. E., Sze, D. Y. 2013; 36 (6): 1536-1547

    Abstract

    INTRODUCTION: A root cause analysis was performed on the occurrence of gastroduodenal ulceration after hepatic radioembolization (RE). We aimed to identify the risk factors in the treated population and to determine the specific mechanism of nontarget RE in individual cases. METHODS: The records of 247 consecutive patients treated with yttrium-90 RE for primary (n = 90) or metastatic (n = 157) liver cancer using either resin (n = 181) or glass (n = 66) microspheres were reviewed. All patients who developed a biopsy-proven microsphere-induced gastroduodenal ulcer were identified. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on baseline parameters and procedural data to determine possible risk factors in the total population. Individual cases were analyzed to ascertain the specific cause, including identification of the culprit vessel(s) leading to extrahepatic deposition of the microspheres. RESULTS: Eight patients (3.2 %) developed a gastroduodenal ulcer. Stasis during injection was the strongest independent risk factor (p = 0.004), followed by distal origin of the gastroduodenal artery (p = 0.004), young age (p = 0.040), and proximal injection of the microspheres (p = 0.043). Prolonged administrations, pain during administration, whole liver treatment, and use of resin microspheres also showed interrelated trends in multivariate analysis. Retrospective review of intraprocedural and postprocedural imaging showed a probable or possible culprit vessel, each a tiny complex collateral vessel, in seven patients. CONCLUSION: Proximal administrations and those resulting in stasis of flow presented increased risk for gastroduodenal ulceration. Patients who had undergone bevacizumab therapy were at high risk for developing stasis.

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s00270-013-0579-1

    View details for PubMedID 23435742

  • Electrosurgical generators GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Tokar, J. L., Barth, B. A., Banerjee, S., Chauhan, S. S., Gottlieb, K. T., Konda, V., Maple, J. T., Murad, F. M., Pfau, P. R., Pleskow, D. K., Siddiqui, U. D., Wang, A., Rodriguez, S. A. 2013; 78 (2): 197-208

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2013.04.164

    View details for Web of Science ID 000321825200001

    View details for PubMedID 23867369

  • Tissue adhesives: cyanoacrylate glue and fibrin sealant GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Bhat, Y. M., Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Chauhan, S. S., Gottlieb, K. T., Konda, V., Maple, J. T., Murad, F. M., Pfau, P. R., Pleskow, D. K., Siddiqui, U. D., Tokar, J. L., Wang, A., Rodriguez, S. A. 2013; 78 (2): 209-215

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2013.04.166

    View details for Web of Science ID 000321825200002

    View details for PubMedID 23867370

  • Methods of luminal distention for colonoscopy. Gastrointestinal endoscopy Maple, J. T., Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Bhat, Y. M., Desilets, D. J., Gottlieb, K. T., Pfau, P. R., Pleskow, D. K., Siddiqui, U. D., Tokar, J. L., Wang, A., Song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2013; 77 (4): 519-525

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2012.09.025

    View details for PubMedID 23415258

  • Infections of the biliary tract. Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America Kochar, R., Banerjee, S. 2013; 23 (2): 199-218

    Abstract

    Infection of the biliary tract, or cholangitis, is a potentially life-threatening condition. Bile duct stones are the most common cause of biliary obstruction predisposing to cholangitis. The key components in the pathogenesis of cholangitis are biliary obstruction and biliary infection. Several underlying mechanisms of bactibilia have been proposed. Characteristic clinical features of cholangitis include abdominal pain, fever, and jaundice. A combination of clinical features with laboratory tests and imaging studies are frequently used to diagnose cholangitis. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is the best diagnostic test. Less invasive imaging tests may be performed initially in clinically stable patients with uncertain diagnoses.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.giec.2012.12.008

    View details for PubMedID 23540957

  • Pancreatic and biliary stents GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Pfau, P. R., Pleskow, D. K., Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Bhat, Y. M., Desilets, D. J., Gottlieb, K. T., Maple, J. T., Siddiqui, U. D., Tokar, J. L., Wang, A., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2013; 77 (3): 319-327

    Abstract

    Biliary and pancreatic stents are used in a variety of benign and malignant conditions including strictures and leaks and in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis.Both plastic and metal stents are safe, effective, and easy to use. SEMSs have traditionally been used for inoperable malignant disease. Covered SEMSs are now being evaluated for use in benign disease. Increasing the duration of patency of both plastic and metal stents remains an important area for future research.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2012.09.026

    View details for Web of Science ID 000314831000001

    View details for PubMedID 23410693

  • Monitoring equipment for endoscopy GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Gottlieb, K. T., Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Bhat, Y. M., Desilets, D. J., Maple, J. T., Pfau, P. R., Pleskow, D. K., Siddiqui, U. D., Tokar, J. L., Wang, A., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2013; 77 (2): 175-180

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2012.09.028

    View details for Web of Science ID 000313705700002

    View details for PubMedID 23245799

  • Endoscopic management of nonlifting colon polyps. Diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy Friedland, S., Shelton, A., Kothari, S., Kochar, R., Chen, A., Banerjee, S. 2013; 2013: 412936-?

    Abstract

    Background and Study Aims. The nonlifting polyp sign of invasive colon cancer is considered highly sensitive and specific for cancer extending beyond the mid-submucosa. However, prior interventions can cause adenomas to become nonlifting due to fibrosis. It is unclear whether nonlifting adenomas can be successfully treated endoscopically. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes in a referral practice incorporating a standardized protocol of attempted endoscopic resection of nonlifting lesions previously treated by biopsy, polypectomy, surgery, or tattoo placement. Patients and Methods. Retrospective review of patients undergoing colonoscopy by one endoscopist at two hospitals found to have nonlifting lesions from prior interventions. Lesions with biopsy proven invasive cancer or definite endoscopic features of invasive cancer were excluded. Lesions ? 8?mm were routinely injected with saline prior to attempted endoscopic resection. Polypectomy was performed using a stiff snare, followed by argon plasma coagulation (APC) if necessary. Results. 26 patients each had a single nonlifting lesion with a history of prior intervention. Endoscopic resection was completed in 25 (96%). 22 required snare resection and APC. 1 patient had invasive cancer and was referred for surgery. The recurrence rate on follow-up colonoscopy was 26%. All of the recurrences were successfully treated endoscopically. There was 1 postprocedure bleed (4%), no perforations, and no other complications. Conclusions. The majority of adenomas that are nonlifting after prior interventions can be treated successfully and safely by a combination of piecemeal polypectomy and ablation. Although recurrence rates are high at 26%, these too can be successfully treated endoscopically.

    View details for DOI 10.1155/2013/412936

    View details for PubMedID 23761952

  • Esophageal function testing GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Wang, A., Pleskow, D. K., Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Bhat, Y. M., Desilets, D. J., Gottlieb, K. T., Maple, J. T., Pfau, P. R., Siddiqui, U. D., Tokar, J. L., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2012; 76 (2): 231-243

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2012.02.022

    View details for Web of Science ID 000306520400001

    View details for PubMedID 22657403

  • Equipment for pediatric endoscopy GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Barth, B. A., Banerjee, S., Bhat, Y. M., Desilets, D. J., Gottlieb, K. T., Maple, J. T., Pfau, P. R., Pleskow, D. K., Siddiqui, U. D., Tokar, J. L., Wang, A., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2012; 76 (1): 8-17

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2012.02.023

    View details for Web of Science ID 000305616400003

    View details for PubMedID 22579260

  • Endoluminal bariatric techniques GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Kethu, S. R., Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Desilets, D. J., Kaul, V., Pedrosa, M. C., Pfau, P. R., Pleskow, D. K., Tokar, J. L., Wang, A., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2012; 76 (1): 1-7

    Abstract

    The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee provides reviews of new or emerging endoscopic technologies that have the potential to have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, with a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent preclinical and clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through January 2011 using the keywords "bariatric," "endoscopic," "intragastric balloon," "duodenojejunal bypass sleeve," and "transoral gastroplasty." Reports on Emerging Technologies are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. These reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Reports on Emerging Technologies are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2012.02.020

    View details for Web of Science ID 000305616400002

    View details for PubMedID 22579259

  • Endoscopic mucosal resection with an over-the-counter hyaluronate preparation GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Friedland, S., Kothari, S., Chen, A., Park, W., Banerjee, S. 2012; 75 (5): 1040-1044

    Abstract

    Hyaluronic acid (HA) provides a long-lasting and distinct mucosal elevation for EMR, but expense and inconvenience have limited its adoption.To evaluate the safety and efficacy of an over-the-counter 0.15% HA preparation for EMR.Retrospective study.Veterans Administration Hospital and university hospital.30 patients with a total of 32 colonic lesions and 1 duodenal lesion.EMR by using HA.En bloc resection rate and complications.EMR was successful in all cases. En bloc resection was achieved in 26 of the 28 lesions up to 25 mm in diameter. Two lesions, both with fibrosis from prior attempted resection, had trace residual tissue necessitating cauterization with argon plasma. Five lesions measuring 30 mm to 60 mm all required piecemeal resection. There was one complication, a postpolypectomy bleed.Small number of patients and retrospective design.EMR may be performed safely and effectively by using an inexpensive, over-the-counter 0.15% HA preparation. Further studies are needed to verify the results of this study and to compare the safety and efficacy of this HA preparation with saline solution.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.010

    View details for Web of Science ID 000303277400016

    View details for PubMedID 22381528

  • Sphincter of Oddi manometry GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Pfau, P. R., Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Desilets, D. J., Kaul, V., Kethu, S. R., Pedrosa, M. C., Pleskow, D. K., Tokar, J., Varadarajulu, S., Wang, A., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2011; 74 (6): 1175-1180

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.055

    View details for Web of Science ID 000297992300001

    View details for PubMedID 22032848

  • Drug-eluting/biodegradable stents GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Tokar, J. L., Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Desilets, D. J., Kaul, V., Kethi, S. R., Pedrosa, M. C., Pfau, P. R., Pleskow, D. K., Varadarajulu, S., Wang, A., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2011; 74 (5): 954-958

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.028

    View details for Web of Science ID 000296867300002

    View details for PubMedID 21944310

  • Enteral stents GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Varadarajulu, S., Banerjee, S., Barth, B., Desilets, D., Kaul, V., Kethu, S., Pedrosa, M., Pfau, P., Tokar, J., Wang, A., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. 2011; 74 (3): 455-464

    Abstract

    The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, with a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through August 2010 for articles related to enteral, esophageal, duodenal, and colonic stents. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2011.04.011

    View details for Web of Science ID 000294660200001

    View details for PubMedID 21762904

  • Enhanced ultrasound imaging GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Desilets, D. J., Kaul, V., Kethu, S. R., Pedrosa, M. C., Pfau, P. R., Tokar, J. L., Varadarajulu, S., Wang, A., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2011; 73 (5): 857-860

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.058

    View details for Web of Science ID 000290292800001

    View details for PubMedID 21521561

  • Endoscopic simulators GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Desilets, D. J., Banerjee, S., Barth, B. A., Kaul, V., Kethu, S. R., Pedrosa, M. C., Pfau, P. R., Tokar, J. L., Varadarajulu, S., Wang, A., song, L. W., Rodriguez, S. A. 2011; 73 (5): 861-867

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.063

    View details for Web of Science ID 000290292800002

    View details for PubMedID 21521562

  • Autofluorescence imaging GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY song, L. W., Banerjee, S., Desilets, D., Diehl, D. L., Farraye, F. A., Kaul, V., Kethu, S. R., Kwon, R. S., Mamula, P., Pedrosa, M. C., Rodriguez, S. A., Tierney, W. M. 2011; 73 (4): 647-650

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2010.11.006

    View details for Web of Science ID 000289131400001

    View details for PubMedID 21296349

  • Embracing New Technology in the Gastroenterology Practice CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY Banerjee, S., Pasricha, P. J. 2010; 8 (10): 848-850

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.07.015

    View details for Web of Science ID 000283042500009

    View details for PubMedID 20883969

  • Automated endoscope reprocessors GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Desilets, D., Kaul, V., Tierney, W. M., Banerjee, S., Diehl, D. L., Farraye, F. A., Kethu, S. R., Kwon, R. S., Mamula, P., Pedrosa, M. C., Rodriguez, S. A., song, L. W. 2010; 72 (4): 675-680

    Abstract

    The ASGE Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, with a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through February 2010 for articles related to automated endoscope reprocessors, using the words endoscope reprocessing, endoscope cleaning, automated endoscope reprocessors, and high-level disinfection. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2010.06.019

    View details for Web of Science ID 000282927600001

    View details for PubMedID 20883843

  • Endoscopic tattooing GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Kethu, S. R., Banerjee, S., Desilets, D., Diehl, D. L., Farraye, F. A., Kaul, V., Kwon, R. S., Mamula, P., Pedrosa, M. C., Rodriguez, S. A., song, L. W., Tierney, W. M. 2010; 72 (4): 681-685

    Abstract

    The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, with a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through January 2010 for articles related to endoscopic tattooing by using the Keywords tattooing, colonic, endoscopic, India ink, indocyanine green in different search term combinations. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2010.06.020

    View details for Web of Science ID 000282927600002

    View details for PubMedID 20883844

  • Minimizing occupational hazards in endoscopy: personal protective equipment, radiation safety, and ergonomics GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Pedrosa, M. C., Farraye, F. A., Shergill, A. K., Banerjee, S., Desilets, D., Diehl, D. L., Kaul, V., Kwon, R. S., Mamula, P., Rodriguez, S. A., Varadarajulu, S., song, L. W., Tierney, W. M. 2010; 72 (2): 227-235

    Abstract

    The ASGE Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, by using a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through August 2009 for articles related to personal protection equipment by using the key words "personal protection equipment" (exp Protective Clothing/ or exp Protective Devices/ or exp Masks/ or exp Occupational Exposure/'') "infection control" paired with "Endoscopy." For the radiation section, the following key words were used: "radiation and endoscopy," "radiation and ERCP," and "radiation safety." For the ergonomics section, the following key words were used: "ergonomics of endoscopy," "endoscopist injury," "medical ergonomics," "endoscopy and musculoskeletal strain," "musculoskeletal injury and endoscopists," "occupational diseases and endoscopy," "cumulative trauma disorder and endoscopy," "repetitive strain injury and endoscopy." Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2010.01.071

    View details for Web of Science ID 000280778800001

    View details for PubMedID 20537638

  • Enteral nutrition access devices GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Kwon, R. S., Banerjee, S., Desilets, D., Diehl, D. L., Farraye, F. A., Kaul, V., Mamula, P., Pedrosa, M. C., Rodriguez, S. A., Varadarajulu, S., song, L. W., Tierney, W. M. 2010; 72 (2): 236-248

    Abstract

    The ASGE Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, performing a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but, in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such situations, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the ASGE Governing Board. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through August 2009 for articles related to endoscopy in patients requiring enteral feeding access by using the keywords "endoscopy," "percutaneous," "gastrostomy," "jejunostomy," "nasogastric," "nasoenteric," "nasojejunal," "transnasal," "feeding tube," "enteric," and "button." Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2010.02.008

    View details for Web of Science ID 000280778800002

    View details for PubMedID 20541746

  • Distal Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Presenting as Cholangitis DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES Lee, M., Banerjee, S., Posner, M. C., Cartwright, C. A. 2010; 55 (7): 1852-1855

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s10620-010-1282-6

    View details for Web of Science ID 000278900200007

    View details for PubMedID 20499173

  • Ultrathin endoscopes GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Rodriguez, S. A., Banerjee, S., Desilets, D., Diehl, D. L., Farraye, F. A., Kaul, V., Kwon, R. S., Mamula, P., Pedrosa, M. C., song, L. W., Tierney, W. M. 2010; 71 (6): 893-898

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2010.01.022

    View details for Web of Science ID 000277700500002

    View details for PubMedID 20438882

  • Screening for Barrett's esophagus in asymptomatic women GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Gerson, L. B., Banerjee, S. 2009; 70 (5): 867-873

    Abstract

    Barrett's esophagus (BE) has been detected in approximately 10% of patients with chronic GERD. Previous studies demonstrated a similar prevalence of BE in asymptomatic adults.To determine the prevalence of BE in asymptomatic women.We invited women scheduled for routine screening colonoscopy (for colorectal cancer) and women undergoing endoscopic examination before bariatric surgery to participate. Patients experiencing heartburn symptoms more than once per month were excluded.Outpatients at Stanford University and Palo Alto VA Health Care System.Biopsies of the esophagogastric junction in the setting of suspected BE, and completion of symptom and health-related quality of life questionnaires to ensure that subjects were asymptomatic.Identification of BE.We detected BE in 8 (6%) of 126 subjects, including 3 (5%) of 61 of the women in the colorectal cancer screening cohort and 5 (8%) of 65 of the women in the pre-bariatric surgery cohort, all of whom had BE measuring 2 cm or less (P = .30). Patients found to have BE were more likely to be older (mean age 60 years vs 49 years, respectively; P = .04), but there was no difference in mean body mass index, ethnicity, or tobacco or alcohol use between patients with and without BE. BE was only present in pre-bariatric surgery subjects younger than the age of 50 and was most common in the 61- to 70-year age cohort in both groups. Erosive esophagitis, microscopic reflux changes, and Helicobacter pylori infection were not more common in the pre-bariatric surgery group.Small number of subjects with BE detected.Short-segment BE was detected in 6% of asymptomatic women undergoing screening endoscopic examinations.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2009.04.053

    View details for Web of Science ID 000271893900008

    View details for PubMedID 19640517

  • Endoscopy is accurate, safe and effective in the assessment and management of complications following gastric bypass surgery. American Journal of Gastroenterology. Lee J, Van Dam J, Morton J, Curet M, Banerjee S. 2009; 70: 919-921
  • Preoperative endoscopic screening for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass has a low yield for anatomic findings OBESITY SURGERY Mong, C., Van Dam, J., Morton, J., Gerson, L., Curet, M., Banerjee, S. 2008; 18 (9): 1067-1073

    Abstract

    Patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y bariatric surgery undergo screening esophagoduodenoscopy (EGD) during preoperative evaluation. The hypothesis is to examine the utility of this examination. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of clinically significant upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract findings at screening EGD in patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y bariatric surgery. A secondary aim was to determine whether preprocedure symptoms could predict findings at EGD.We evaluated records of patients undergoing EGD prior to bariatric surgery between 2000 and 2005 at the Stanford University Medical Center. Clinical, endoscopic, and pathological data were analyzed. The prevalence of endoscopic findings of clinical significance was determined.Two hundred seventy two complete patient records were identified and included in the study. Of these, 237 (87%) were female and 197 (72%) were Caucasian. The mean age was 43 +/- 9.68 years and mean body mass index was 48 +/- 7.95 kg/m(2). Of the 272 patients, 33 (12%) had EGD findings of clinical significance including erosive esophagitis (3.7%), Barrett's esophagus (3.7%), gastric ulcers (2.9%), erosive gastritis (1.8%), duodenal ulcers (0.7%), and gastric carcinoid (0.3%). No patients had malignancy. Of these 33 patients, 22 (67%) had UGI symptoms.Significant findings at screening EGD were found in 12% of patients. While EGD may be low-yield, the findings could be useful in guiding clinical decision making.

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s11695-008-9600-1

    View details for Web of Science ID 000258456400003

    View details for PubMedID 18574642

  • Use of flexible endoscopic scissors to cut obstructing suture material in gastric bypass patients OBESITY SURGERY Patel, C., Van Dam, J., Curet, M., Morton, J. M., Banerjee, S. 2008; 18 (3): 336-339

    Abstract

    With the epidemic increase in obesity in the USA and consequent increased demand for bariatric surgery, new complications of the surgery are being described. The most common surgery practiced is the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP). Unraveling of suture material at the gastrojejunal anastomosis may occur, which may be troublesome if nonabsorbable suture is employed. We describe, for the first time, two patients who developed obstructive symptoms as a consequence of food matter/bezoars entrapped within a mesh of unraveled nonabsorbable suture material at their anastomoses. One of these patients also developed ulceration, presumably as a result of pressure necrosis from the entrapped bezoar. We describe a third patient where the placement of nonabsorbable sutures led to obstructive symptoms by limiting distensibility at an otherwise satisfactory anastomosis. We also describe for the first time, the use of a new endoscopic scissors in cutting luminal suture material with subsequent resolution of the clinical problem.

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s11695-007-9283-z

    View details for Web of Science ID 000253627700017

    View details for PubMedID 18197458

  • Preoperative Endoscopic Screening for Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass has a Low Yield for Anatomic Findings Obesity Surgery. Mong C, Van Dam J, Gerson L, Morton JM, Curet MJ, Banerjee S. 2008; 18: 1067-73
  • Antibiotic prophylaxis for gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Banerjee S, Shen B, Nelson DB et al. 2008; 67: 791-798
  • Infection control during gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Banerjee S, Shen B, Nelson DB et al. 2008; 67: 781-790
  • Endoscopic mucosal resection of a solitary gastric plasmacytoma DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY Roost, J., Mai, H., Banerjee, S., Longacre, T., Van Dam, J. 2007; 19 (3): 139-141
  • Reprocessing Failure. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Banerjee S, Nelson DB, Dominitz JA et al. 2007; 66: 869-871
  • CT colonography for colon cancer screening GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Banerjee, S., Van Dam, J. 2006; 63 (1): 121-133

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2005.07.021

    View details for Web of Science ID 000234415000024

    View details for PubMedID 16377329

  • CT colonography for colon cancer screening Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Banerjee S, Van Dam J 2006; 63: 121-133
  • Analysis of cystic fibrosis gener product (CFTR) function in patients with pancreas divisum and recurrent acute pancreatitis AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY Gelrud, A., SHETH, S., Banerjee, S., Weed, D., Shea, J., Chuttani, R., Howell, D. A., Telford, J. J., Carr-Locke, D. L., Regan, M. M., Ellis, L., Durie, P. R., Freedman, S. D. 2004; 99 (8): 1557-1562

    Abstract

    The mechanism by which pancreas divisum may lead to recurrent episodes of acute pancreatitis in a subset of individuals is unknown. Abnormalities of the cystic fibrosis gene product (CFTR) have been implicated in the genesis of idiopathic chronic pancreatitis. The aim of this study was to determine if CFTR function is abnormal in patients with pancreas divisum and recurrent acute pancreatitis (PD/RAP).A total of 69 healthy control subjects, 12 patients with PD/RAP, 16 obligate heterozygotes with a single CFTR mutation, and 95 patients with cystic fibrosis were enrolled. CFTR function was analyzed by nasal transepithelial potential difference testing in vivo. The outcomes of the PD/RAP patients following endoscopic and surgical treatments were concomitantly analyzed.Direct measurement of CFTR function in nasal epithelium in response to isoproterenol demonstrated that the values for PD/RAP were intermediate between those observed for healthy controls and cystic fibrosis patients. The median value was 13 mV for PD/RAP subjects, which was statistically different from healthy controls (22 mV, p= 0.001) and cystic fibrosis pancreatic sufficient (-1 mV, p < 0.0001) and pancreatic insufficient (-3 mV, p < 0.0001) patients.These results suggest a link between CFTR dysfunction and recurrent acute pancreatitis in patients with pancreas divisum and may explain why a subset of patients with pancreas divisum develops recurrent acute pancreatitis.

    View details for DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.30834.x

    View details for Web of Science ID 000223355200030

    View details for PubMedID 15307877

Footer Links:

Stanford Medicine Resources: