Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters








Language
Year range
1.
Clinical Endoscopy ; : 754-760, 2023.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1000069

ABSTRACT

Background/Aims@#Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) can heal a variety of defects within the gastrointestinal (GI) tract via applying negative pressure, which reduces the defect size, aspirates the infected fluid, and promotes granulation tissue. Here we present our experience with EVT as it relates to both spontaneous and iatrogenic upper GI tract perforations, leaks, and fistulas. @*Methods@#This retrospective study was conducted at four large hospital centers. All patients who underwent EVT between June 2018 and March 2021 were included. Data on multiple variables were collected, including demographics, defect size and location, number and intervals of EVT exchanges, technical success, and hospital length of stay. Student t-test and the chi-squared test were used to analyze the data. @*Results@#Twenty patients underwent EVT. The most common defect cause was spontaneous esophageal perforation (50%). The most common defect location was the distal esophagus (55%). The success rate was 80%. Seven patients were treated with EVT as the primary closure method. The mean number of exchanges was five with a mean interval of 4.3 days between exchanges. The mean length of hospital stay was 55.8 days. @*Conclusions@#EVT is a safe and effective initial management option for esophageal leaks and perforations.

2.
Clinical Endoscopy ; : 269-274, 2021.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-897759

ABSTRACT

Background/Aims@#The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) revised its guidelines for risk stratification of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of the revision and to compare it to the previous guidelines. @*Methods@#We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 267 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. We identified high-risk patients according to the original and revised guidelines and examined the diagnostic accuracy of both guidelines. We measured the association between individual criteria and choledocholithiasis. @*Results@#Under the original guidelines, 165 (62%) patients met the criteria for high risk, of whom 79% had confirmed choledocholithiasis. The categorization had a sensitivity and specificity of 68% and 55%, respectively, for the detection of choledocholithiasis. Under the revised guidelines, 86 (32%) patients met the criteria for high risk, of whom 83% had choledocholithiasis. The revised categorization had a lower sensitivity and higher specificity of 37% and 80%, respectively. The positive predictive value of the high-risk categorization increased with the revision, reflecting a potential decrease in diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatograpies (ERCPs). Stone visualized on imaging had the greatest specificity for choledocholithiasis. Gallstone pancreatitis was not associated with the risk for choledocholithiasis. @*Conclusions@#The 2019 revision of the ASGE guidelines decreases the utilization of ERCP as a diagnostic modality and offers an improved risk stratification tool.

3.
Clinical Endoscopy ; : 269-274, 2021.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-890055

ABSTRACT

Background/Aims@#The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) revised its guidelines for risk stratification of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of the revision and to compare it to the previous guidelines. @*Methods@#We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 267 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. We identified high-risk patients according to the original and revised guidelines and examined the diagnostic accuracy of both guidelines. We measured the association between individual criteria and choledocholithiasis. @*Results@#Under the original guidelines, 165 (62%) patients met the criteria for high risk, of whom 79% had confirmed choledocholithiasis. The categorization had a sensitivity and specificity of 68% and 55%, respectively, for the detection of choledocholithiasis. Under the revised guidelines, 86 (32%) patients met the criteria for high risk, of whom 83% had choledocholithiasis. The revised categorization had a lower sensitivity and higher specificity of 37% and 80%, respectively. The positive predictive value of the high-risk categorization increased with the revision, reflecting a potential decrease in diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatograpies (ERCPs). Stone visualized on imaging had the greatest specificity for choledocholithiasis. Gallstone pancreatitis was not associated with the risk for choledocholithiasis. @*Conclusions@#The 2019 revision of the ASGE guidelines decreases the utilization of ERCP as a diagnostic modality and offers an improved risk stratification tool.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL