RESUMEN
Gallbladder polyps are a common incidental finding. Although most of these are benign, differentiating non-neoplastic from neoplastic polyps is challenging. Trans-abdominal ultrasound is the primary imaging study for diagnosing and monitoring gallbladder polyps. In challenging cases, the use of endoscopic ultrasound or contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound could assist in making decisions. According to current guidelines, a cholecystectomy is recommended in patients with polyps measuring 10 mm or larger and in symptomatic patients with polyps measuring less than 10 mm. A cholecystectomy is also recommended if one or more risk factors for malignancy are present in patients with polyps measuring 6-9 mm. These risk factors include age older than 60 years, primary sclerosing cholangitis, Asian ethnicity, and sessile polyps, including focal gallbladder wall thickening >4 mm. Follow-up ultrasound is recommended at six months, one year, and two years for polyps measuring 6-9 mm in patients without risk factors for malignancy, and for polyps less than 5 mm in patients with one or more risk factors for malignancy. Discontinuing the surveillance could be considered in the absence of growth. Follow-up is not required for polyps measuring less than 5 mm in patients without the risk factors for a malignancy. On the other hand, the evidence for the guidelines is still lacking and of low quality. The management of gallbladder polyps should be individualized based on the currently available guidelines.
RESUMEN
Immunoglobulin G4-related disease (IgG4-RD) is an immune-mediated fibroinflammatory disease. IgG4-RD can affect any organ system, including the pancreas, bile ducts, salivary glands, mesentery, and retroperitoneum. On the other hand, small intestine involvement is extremely rare. This paper describes a case of IgG4-RD involving the small bowel, particularly at the distal ileum. An 81-year-old female was admitted to the authors’ hospital complaining of abdominal pain, dyspepsia, and hematochezia. The laboratory tests, including tumor markers and IgG4, were within normal limits. A colonoscopy did not show any abnormal findings. Abdominal computed tomography revealed segmental aneurysmal dilatation and wall thickening at the distal ileum, suggesting malignant conditions, such as small bowel lymphoma. The patient underwent an exploratory laparoscopy and ileocecectomy to differentiate a malignancy. A histopathology examination revealed dense lymphoplasmacytic infiltration, storiform fibrosis, and IgG4-positive plasma cells (>50 per high power field). The patient was finally diagnosed with IgG4-RD. The patient was followed up in the outpatient clinic for five years without recurrence. This paper suggests that a radical resection without maintenance therapy can be a treatment option, particularly when the IgG4-RD manifests as a localized gastrointestinal tract lesion.
RESUMEN
Purpose@#To evaluate the effects and limitations of lacrimal endoscopy without silicone tube intubation in patients with epiphora. @*Methods@#We conducted a retrospective chart review of 64 eyes in 49 patients who underwent lacrimal endoscopy between May 2021 and May 2022. The clinical characteristics, irrigation test results, lacrimal endoscopic findings, and type of surgery were analyzed. @*Results@#The mean duration of symptoms was 31.2 months, and was significantly longer in the failure group than in the success group (p = 0.043). Irrigation tests showed passage, partial obstruction, and complete obstruction in 20 (31.3%), 16 (25.0%), and 28 (43.7%) eyes, respectively. Lacrimal endoscopy showed narrowing, mucus, fibrosis, granulation, and stones in 41 (64.0%), 12 (18.8%), 6 (9.3%), 3 (4.7%), and 2 (3.1%) eyes, respectively. Following lacrimal endoscopy, 32 (50.0%) eyes each were included in the success and failure groups. Preoperative irrigation test results did not affect the success rate (p = 0.203). Silicone tube intubation and dacryocystorhinostomy were performed in 5 (7.8%) and 8 (12.5%) eyes, respectively, because the symptoms did not improve after lacrimal endoscopy. @*Conclusions@#Lacrimal endoscopy, performed without silicone tube intubation, was effective in improving symptoms and may guide the choice of surgical technique, if required.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided intervention has gradually become a standard treatment for peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, it is difficult to popularize the procedure in Korea because of restrictions on insurance claims regarding the use of endoscopic accessories, as well as the lack of standardized Korean clinical practice guidelines. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (appointed a Task Force to develope medical guidelines by referring to the manual for clinical practice guidelines development prepared by the National Evidence-Based Healthcare Collaborating Agency. Previous studies on PFCs were searched, and certain studies were selected with the help of experts. Then, a set of key questions was selected, and treatment guidelines were systematically reviewed. Answers to these questions and recommendations were selected via peer review. This guideline discusses endoscopic management of PFCs and makes recommendations on indication for the procedure, pre-procedural preparations, optimal approach for drainage, procedural considerations (e.g., types of stent, advantages and disadvantages of plastic and metal stents, and accessories), adverse events of endoscopic intervention, and procedural quality issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This will be revised as necessary to address advances and changes in technology and evidence obtained in clinical practice and future studies.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy appointed a Task Force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided intervention has gradually become a standard treatment for peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, it is difficult to popularize the procedure in Korea because of restrictions on insurance claims regarding the use of endoscopic accessories, as well as the lack of standardized Korean clinical practice guidelines. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy appointed a Task Force to develop medical guidelines by referring to the manual for clinical practice guidelines development prepared by the National Evidence-Based Healthcare Collaborating Agency. Previous studies on PFCs were searched, and certain studies were selected with the help of experts. Then, a set of key questions was selected, and treatment guidelines were systematically reviewed. Answers to these questions and recommendations were selected via peer review. This guideline discusses endoscopic management of PFCs and makes recommendations on Indications for the procedure, pre-procedural preparations, optimal approach for drainage, procedural considerations (e.g., types of stent, advantages and disadvantages of plastic and metal stents, and accessories), adverse events of endoscopic intervention, and procedural quality issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This will be revised as necessary to address advances and changes in technology and evidence obtained in clinical practice and future studies.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a task force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a Task Force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in 8 categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided intervention has gradually become a standard treatment for peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, it is difficult to popularize the procedure in Korea because of restrictions on insurance claims regarding the use of endoscopic accessories, as well as the lack of standardized Korean clinical practice guidelines. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a Task Force to develope medical guidelines by referring to the manual for clinical practice guidelines development prepared by the National Evidence-Based Healthcare Collaborating Agency. Previous studies on PFCs were searched, and certain studies were selected with the help of experts. Then, a set of key questions was selected, and treatment guidelines were systematically reviewed. Answers to these questions and recommendations were selected via peer review. This guideline discusses endoscopic management of PFCs and makes recommendations on Indications for the procedure, pre-procedural preparations, optimal approach for drainage, procedural considerations (e.g., types of stent, advantages and disadvantages of plastic and metal stents, and accessories), adverse events of endoscopic intervention, and procedural quality issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This will be revised as necessary to address advances and changes in technology and evidence obtained in clinical practice and future studies.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy appointed a Task Force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues.This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy appointed a Task Force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided intervention has gradually become a standard treatment for peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, it is difficult to popularize the procedure in Korea because of restrictions on insurance claims regarding the use of endoscopic accessories, as well as the lack of standardized Korean clinical practice guidelines. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy appointed a Task Force to develop medical guidelines by referring to the manual for clinical practice guidelines development prepared by the National Evidence-Based Healthcare Collaborating Agency. Previous studies on PFCs were searched, and certain studies were selected with the help of experts. Then, a set of key questions was selected, and treatment guidelines were systematically reviewed. Answers to these questions and recommendations were selected via peer review. This guideline discusses endoscopic management of PFCs and makes recommendations on Indications for the procedure, pre-procedural preparations, optimal approach for drainage, procedural considerations (e.g., types of stent, advantages and disadvantages of plastic and metal stents, and accessories), adverse events of endoscopic intervention, and procedural quality issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This will be revised as necessary to address advances and changes in technology and evidence obtained in clinical practice and future studies.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a task force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.
RESUMEN
Purpose@#Patients with atopic dermatitis often have difficulty managing their condition after epiblepharon repair surgery due to edema and itching at the operation site. We examined surgical outcomes in relation to atopic dermatitis. @*Methods@#A retrospective review of medical records was performed on epiblepharon patients and eyelids (patients = 1,829; eyelids = 4,694) that were followed after surgical correction between 2005 and 2016. Patients were classified into those with atopic dermatitis (the atopic dermatitis group) and a control group. Success rates and recurrence rates were compared and analyzed. @*Results@#The mean patient age was 5.82 ± 2.87 years. Of the 200 eyelids with atopic dermatitis, 12 eyelids (6.0%) had undercorrection, as did 108 (2.4%) of the 4,494 eyelids of the control group. Of the 188 eyelids with atopic dermatitis, 13 (6.9%) underwent reoperation due to recurrence, as did 57 (1.3%) of the 4,386 eyelids of the control group. A statistically significant difference between two groups was confirmed in comparing failure rates and recurrence rates (p = 0.002, p < 0.001). @*Conclusions@#The failure rates of surgery and recurrence rates of epiblepharon symptoms were significantly higher in patients with atopic dermatitis. It can be assumed that the suture fixed to the tarsal plate was untied or loosened due to edema and itching of the operation site due to atopic dermatitis. In consideration of this, more effective treatment methods, such as solid suturing, are needed in clinical practice for atopic dermatitis patients.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy appointed a Task Force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues.This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a Task Force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in 8 categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.
RESUMEN
Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided intervention has gradually become a standard treatment for peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, it is difficult to popularize the procedure in Korea because of restrictions on insurance claims regarding the use of endoscopic accessories, as well as the lack of standardized Korean clinical practice guidelines. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a Task Force to develope medical guidelines by referring to the manual for clinical practice guidelines development prepared by the National Evidence-Based Healthcare Collaborating Agency. Previous studies on PFCs were searched, and certain studies were selected with the help of experts. Then, a set of key questions was selected, and treatment guidelines were systematically reviewed. Answers to these questions and recommendations were selected via peer review. This guideline discusses endoscopic management of PFCs and makes recommendations on Indications for the procedure, pre-procedural preparations, optimal approach for drainage, procedural considerations (e.g., types of stent, advantages and disadvantages of plastic and metal stents, and accessories), adverse events of endoscopic intervention, and procedural quality issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This will be revised as necessary to address advances and changes in technology and evidence obtained in clinical practice and future studies.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of BOTULAX® in subjects with essential blepharospasm.METHODS: In this study, a total of 250 subjects with essential blepharospasm were enrolled at 15 investigational sites and a total of 220 subjects completed the study. The efficacy and safety were evaluated at weeks 4 and 16 after treatment compared with baseline. In total, 240 subjects were enrolled, treated with the investigational product, and evaluable for the primary efficacy assessment at week 4 after treatment; these subjects were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. With the ITT set as the main efficacy set, efficacy assessment included Jankovic rating scale (JRS), functional disability score, investigator evaluation of global response and quality of life. Safety assessment including the incidence of adverse events was also performed.RESULTS: In terms of the primary efficacy endpoint (i.e., change in JRS total score at week 4 after treatment from baseline [ITT set]), mean change indicated a statistically significant reduction (p < 0.0001) and demonstrated the non-inferiority of the test drug to similar drugs. In terms of the secondary efficacy endpoints, mean change in JRS total score at week 16 after treatment and mean change in functional disability score at weeks 4 and 16 after treatment both exhibited a statistically significant reduction compared with baseline (p < 0.0001 for all). Among the 249 subjects treated with the investigational product in this study, 44 (17.67%) experienced 76 treatment emergent adverse events but no serious adverse events were observed.CONCLUSIONS: Based on the study results, BOTULAX® is considered to be an effective and safe treatment for essential blepharospasm.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Endoscopic bile duct decompression using bilateral self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) deployed via a stent-in-stent (SIS) method is considered a preferred procedure for malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO). However, occlusion thereof occurs frequently. Here, we investigated stent patency duration and risk factors related to stent obstruction with bilateral SIS placement for MHBO at two large centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study reviewed data on patients with MHBO who underwent endoscopic biliary drainage using the SIS method. Clinical outcomes, including stent patency duration and patient overall survival, were analyzed. Factors associated with stent patency were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Seventy patients with MHBO underwent endoscopic biliary drainage using the SIS method. Median age was 68 years old, and median follow-up duration was 140 days (interquartile range, 57–329). The proportion of high-grade MHBOs (Bismuth type IV) was 57.1%. Median stent patency duration with the SIS method was 108 days according to Kaplan-Meier curves. Median patient survival analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method was 181 days. Multivariate analysis indicated that higher baseline bilirubin (> 6.1 mg/dL) as an independent risk factor related to stent patency (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In endoscopic biliary decompression using SEMS placed with the SIS method, obstructive jaundice was a risk factor for stent patency. The SIS method for high-grade MHBO showed short stent patency.