'Don’t take shortcuts,' endoscopy researcher advises
Dr. Jovani compared two different types of needles for tissue acquisition with endoscopic ultrasound.
-
11/01/2025
Manol Jovani, MD, MPH, has published more than 70 research papers on clinical GI research, some resulting in the publication of international guidelines. But the work he’s most proud of took place when he was a graduate student at Harvard, working on a master’s degree in epidemiology and biostatistics.
Jovani compared two different types of needles for tissue acquisition with endoscopic ultrasound. His finding that fine needle biopsy is better than fine needle aspiration for lesions isn’t groundbreaking, yet “the reason why I feel proud of that one is because it’s the first paper I did completely by myself,” said Jovani, medical director for advanced therapeutic endoscopy with Gastro Health Florida, in Miami, Florida.
Dr. Jovani has since contributed to countless peer-reviewed articles and book chapters and has presented research findings at meetings across the globe. He will be program director of the upcoming gastroenterology fellowship program at Florida International University School of Medicine, Miami, and participates in several endoscopy panels in the U.S. and in Europe to set guidelines and improve the quality of endoscopic procedures.
Therapeutic endoscopy is a clinical interest of his, specifically in the areas of third space, biliopancreatic and bariatric endoscopy. In an interview, he discussed how he used third space endoscopy to save a patient and improve her quality of life.
Indeed, helping patients feel better is the most satisfying part of his career.
“A lot of people may have acute pain or an early cancer or many other problems that they need solving. As a physician, you can be the one who solves it,” Jovani said.
But training in medicine involves hard work, he advised. In the interview, he explained why young doctors should never rely on shortcuts to solve problems.
Therapeutic endoscopy is a specific interest of yours. How has this field advanced since you’ve been practicing gastroenterology?
Dr. Jovani: In the last 10 to 15 years, significant improvements have come along. As an example, lumen-apposing metal stents have revolutionized the way we do therapeutic endoscopy. A lot of procedures were not possible beforehand, and we would have to send patients to surgery. Now, these can be done with endoscopy.
Examples include drainage of pancreatic collections, gallbladder drainage, or gastrojejunostomy (a connection between the stomach and the intestine) or reversal of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass to reach and drain the bile duct.
Many of these procedures can be done with these metal stents that were not possible beforehand. Bariatric endoscopy is a relatively new field, and that has significantly changed the management of obesity. There’s also third space endoscopy for the treatment of gastroparesis, achalasia, and early cancer.
What is third space endoscopy and how are you applying it in your practice?
Dr. Jovani: Third space endoscopy refers to a new space that’s created between the mucosa and the muscularis propria into the submucosa. We go in the submucosa, we inject some fluid there, and we cut the submucosa and we separate the mucosa from the muscle.
This allows us to do a lot of procedures. For patients with achalasia, we can tunnel through the submucosa, get into the muscle and perform myotomy, meaning that we can cut the muscle. By doing so, we can treat achalasia with a minimally invasive method. Patients can either go home the next day or even on the same day.
The same thing applies for gastroparesis. With early cancer, we can go through in the submucosa, and if the cancer is in the mucosa only, or if it is in the very superficial submucosa, we can treat it without a need for surgery. Sometimes the procedure is simple, but other times it can be very challenging.
Can you discuss a challenging case where you applied third space endoscopy?
Dr. Jovani: It was a gastric cancer case. I did an endoscopic ultrasound for staging purposes. When I saw the lesion, it looked very superficial, like an early cancer of the stomach. I called the surgeon and said I could take it out with endoscopy. And it was in a very difficult location, so it was a very challenging procedure. It took about 12 hours to do it, but I was able to completely take it out. More than a year later, the patient was cancer free and more importantly, we preserved the stomach. Before I did this, she was prepared to undergo total gastrectomy, which meant I would have taken out her entire stomach.
Instead, with this minimally invasive procedure, I was able to take the cancer away and keep the stomach, which preserved her quality of life as well.
When you don’t have the stomach, obviously you adapt, but the quality of life is never the same. The type of food you eat, the frequency of eating, the quality of food you eat is not the same. The fact that we could avoid that in this patient feels very good.
What advice would you give to aspiring medical students?
Dr. Jovani: Do the hard work that’s required to be a doctor. Being a physician is a hard job, but it’s very rewarding. It’s like going to the gym — there really are no shortcuts. You have to do the work, you have to get tired, you have to study hard. You may study things you might not think will be useful to you necessarily in the future field that you choose. If it is GI, you still need to study all the other fields because sometimes patients may have GI diseases that are connecting with other diseases and you won’t know that if you haven’t studied the other diseases.
Patients are not only one disease, but they are also complex patients. Sometimes if you try to correct one disease, you create a complication with the other disease and you might not be aware of that.
Don’t create shortcuts like ChatGPT, things that are becoming fashionable with younger people today. Do the hard work the old way in which you have to memorize things. Knowledge is the only thing that really can help the patient.
Go to GI meetings. Offer to meet people, collaborate, network. Don’t be shy about it. Even if it is not natural to you, just do it. It’ll become more natural as you do it. GI, like any other field, any other endeavor in human society, is something that also depends on interactions. Therefore, it’s good to learn how to interact, how to network, how to do research projects.
Even with people from far away, communication is very easy. You don’t really need to do research projects only with people in your local environment. You can do research projects with people who are on the other side of the state or even on the other side of the world.
You place an emphasis on individualized patient care. Can you discuss what that means to you?
Dr. Jovani: It basically means that there isn’t one size fits all in the management of diseases. Obviously there are some general principles that are applicable to everybody, but sometimes for the single specific patient, what works for one patient might not necessarily work for the next patient.
With Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for example, there are so many things that go into that. Most papilla are in a certain position and it’s relatively easy to cannulate. But there are others that are in very different positions or in different angulations and they might require specific techniques that are not applicable in the majority of cases. You have to adapt to the single patient. How you speak to the patient is also important. Some may prefer a certain type of communication and other patients may prefer another type of communication involving patients or family. You have to adapt to the single patient.
You have to understand the different types of personalities and adapt how you explain things or how you communicate disease, or management of disease or even complications to the specific patient. Different approaches are more appropriate for different patients with different needs. At the end of the day, patients are single individuals after all.
Where do you see the field of GI medicine advancing internationally over the next 5 years?
Dr. Jovani: Artificial intelligence or AI is a big player. It will help with diagnostics primarily, at least over the short term. Potentially it can help with therapeutics as well. There’s a lot of investment and excitement and interest in artificial intelligence.
Therapeutic endoscopy robotics, especially in interventional endoscopy, third space endoscopy, is also gaining attention.
With regards to bariatric endoscopy, we should have a CPT code for it in January 2027. This will increase volume because it’ll be covered more by insurance. These are things that will help advance GI in the next five or 10 years.
Lightning Round
What’s one hobby you’d like to pick up?
Kite surfing
What’s your favorite season of the year?
Summer
What’s your favorite way to spend a weekend?
Traveling or going to the beach
If you could have dinner with any historical figure, who would it be?
Jesus Christ
What’s your favorite holiday tradition?
New Year’s Eve
Are you a planner or more spontaneous?
Planner
What’s the best piece of advice you’ve ever received?
You can do it!
What’s your comfort food?
Lasagna
Summary content
7 Key Takeaways
-
1
Developed a paper-based colorimetric sensor array for chemical threat detection.
-
2
Can detect 12 chemical agents, including industrial toxins.
-
3
Production cost is under 20 cents per chip.
-
4
Utilizes dye-loaded silica particles on self-adhesive paper.
-
5
Provides rapid, simultaneous identification through image analysis.
-
6
Inspired by the mammalian olfactory system for pattern recognition.
-
7
Future developments include a machine learning-enabled reader device.
The guidelines emphasize four-hour gastric emptying studies over two-hour testing. How do you see this affecting diagnostic workflows in practice?
Dr. Staller: Moving to a four-hour solid-meal scintigraphy will actually simplify decision-making. The two-hour reads miss a meaningful proportion of delayed emptying; standardizing on four hours reduces false negatives and the “maybe gastroparesis” purgatory that leads to repeat testing. Practically, it means closer coordination with nuclear medicine (longer slots, consistent standardized meal), updating order sets to default to a four-hour protocol, and educating front-line teams so patients arrive appropriately prepped. The payoff is fewer equivocal studies and more confident treatment plans.
Metoclopramide and erythromycin are the only agents conditionally recommended for initial therapy. How does this align with what is being currently prescribed?
Dr. Staller: This largely mirrors real-world practice. Metoclopramide remains the only FDA-approved prokinetic for gastroparesis, and short “pulsed” erythromycin courses are familiar to many of us—recognizing tachyphylaxis limits durability. Our recommendation is “conditional” because the underlying evidence is modest and patient responses are heterogeneous, but it formalizes what many clinicians already do: start with metoclopramide (lowest effective dose, limited duration, counsel on neurologic adverse effects) and reserve erythromycin for targeted use (exacerbations, bridging).
Several agents, including domperidone and prucalopride, received recommendations against first-line use. How will that influence discussions with patients who ask about these therapies?
Dr. Staller: Two points I share with patients: evidence and access/safety. For domperidone, the data quality is mixed, and US access is through an FDA IND mechanism; you’re committing patients to EKG monitoring and a non-trivial administrative lift. For prucalopride, the gastroparesis-specific evidence isn’t strong enough yet to justify first-line use. So, our stance is not “never,” it’s just “not first.” If someone fails or cannot tolerate initial therapy, we can revisit these options through shared decision-making, setting expectations about benefit, monitoring, and off-label use. The guideline language helps clinicians have a transparent, evidence-based conversation at the first visit.
The guidelines suggest reserving procedures like G-POEM and gastric electrical stimulation for refractory cases. In your practice, how do you decide when a patient is “refractory” to medical therapy?
Dr. Staller: I define “refractory” with three anchors.
1. Adequate trials of foundational care: dietary optimization and glycemic control; an antiemetic; and at least one prokinetic at appropriate dose/duration (with intolerance documented if stopped early).
2. Persistent, function-limiting symptoms: ongoing nausea/vomiting, weight loss, dehydration, ER visits/hospitalizations, or malnutrition despite the above—ideally tracked with a validated instrument (e.g., GCSI) plus nutritional metrics.
3. Objective correlation: delayed emptying on a standardized 4-hour solid-meal study that aligns with the clinical picture (and medications that slow emptying addressed).
At that point, referral to a center with procedural expertise for G-POEM or consideration of gastric electrical stimulation becomes appropriate, with multidisciplinary evaluation (GI, nutrition, psychology, and, when needed, surgery).
What role do you see dietary modification and glycemic control playing alongside pharmacologic therapy in light of these recommendations?
Dr. Staller: They’re the bedrock. A small-particle, lower-fat, calorie-dense diet—often leaning on nutrient-rich liquids—can meaningfully reduce symptom burden. Partnering with dietitians early pays dividends. For diabetes, tighter glycemic control can improve gastric emptying and symptoms; I explicitly review medications that can slow emptying (e.g., opioids; consider timing/necessity of GLP-1 receptor agonists) and encourage continuous glucose monitor-informed adjustments. Pharmacotherapy sits on top of those pillars; without them, medications will likely underperform.
The guideline notes “considerable unmet need” in gastroparesis treatment. Where do you think future therapies or research are most urgently needed?
Dr. Staller: I see three major areas.
1. Truly durable prokinetics: agents that improve emptying and symptoms over months, with better safety than legacy options (e.g., next-gen motilin/ghrelin agonists, better-studied 5-HT4 strategies).
2. Endotyping and biomarkers: we need to stop treating all gastroparesis as one disease. Clinical, physiologic, and microbiome/omic signatures that predict who benefits from which therapy (drug vs G-POEM vs GES) would transform care.
3. Patient-centered trials: larger, longer RCTs that prioritize validated symptom and quality-of-life outcomes, include nutritional endpoints, and reflect real-world medication confounders.
Our guideline intentionally highlights these gaps to hopefully catalyze better trials and smarter referral pathways.
Dr. Staller is with the Division of Gastroenterology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston.