Acurácia diagnóstica do painel gástrico para gastrite atrófica em brasileiros e o efeito dos inibidores de bomba de prótons / Diagnostic accuracy of gastropanel® for atrophic gastritis in brazilian subjects and the effect of proton pump inhibitors

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: It has been proposed that the combination of gastrin-17 (G-17), pepsinogens I and II (PGI and PGII), and anti-Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) antibodies (GastroPanel®, BIOHIT HealthCare, Helsinki, Finland) could serve as biomarkers of atrophic gastritis. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to ensure the diagnostic accuracy of GastroPanel® and evaluate the effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on these biomarkers. METHODS: Dyspeptic patients who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopy were enrolled in the present study. Histological findings, which were the gold standard to stratify groups, were as follows: no atrophy (controls); antrum atrophy; corpus atrophy; multifocal atrophy; and neoplasia. G-17, PGI, PGII, and anti-H. pylori immunoglobulin (Ig)G antibodies were assayed using commercially available kits. The ratio of PGI/PGII was calculated. RESULTS: Among 308 patients, 159 (51.6%) were PPI users. The overall prevalence of atrophy was 43.8% (n=135). Ninety-two (29.9%) patients were H. pylori positive according to anti-H. pylori IgG levels. G-17 levels were not low in those with antrum atrophy but were high in those with corpus and multifocal atrophies. PGI levels were significantly lower in those with corpus and multifocal atrophies. The sensitivity of PGI <30 µg/L to detect corpus atrophy was 50% (95% CI 27.8-72.1%), with a specificity of 93.2% (95% CI 84.3-97.5%), a positive likelihood ratio of 7.4 (95% CI 2.9-19.2), and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.8). A small number of subjects (n=6) exhibited moderate to intense atrophy (4%), among whom 66.7% exhibited decreased PGI levels. PPI significantly increased the levels of G-17 and PGI, except in those with corpus and multifocal atrophies, in whom PGI levels were not increased by PPIs. CONCLUSION: GastroPanel® (Gastrin-17, PGI, and PGI/PGII ratio) did not demonstrate high sensitivity for detecting gastric atrophy.

RESUMO CONTEXTO: Foi proposto que a combinação de gastrina 17 (G-17), pepsinogênios I e II (PGI e PGII), e anticorpos anti-Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) (GastroPanel®, BIOHIT HealthCare), poderiam indicar gastrite atrófica. OBJETIVO: Portanto, o objetivo foi averiguar a acurácia diagnóstica do painel gástrico e avaliar o efeito dos inibidores de bomba de prótons (IBP) nesses marcadores. MÉTODOS: Pacientes dispépticos que se submeteram à endoscopia gastrointestinal entraram no estudo. Os achados histológicos foram o padrão ouro para estratificar os grupos: sem atrofia (controles), atrofia de antro, atrofia de corpo, atrofia multifocal e neoplasia. G-17, PGI, PGII, e anticorpos IgG anti-H. pylori foram determinados por kits comerciais. A razão PGI/PGII foi calculada. RESULTADOS: Entre 308 pacientes que foram incluídos, 159 estavam usando IBP (51,6%). A prevalência de atrofia foi de 43,8% (135 pacientes). H. pylori foi positivo em 92 (29,9%) pacientes por IgG anti-H. pylori. G-17 não estava diminuída na atrofia do antro, mas estava elevada nas atrofias do corpo e multifocal. PGI estava significantemente menor nas atrofias de corpo e multifocal. A sensibilidade da PGI <30 µg/L de indicar atrofia do corpo foi 50% (95%IC 27,8-72,1%) com especificidade de 93,2% (95%IC 84,3-97,5%), razão de verossimilhança positiva de 7,4 (95%IC 2,9-19,2) e razão de verossimilhança negativa de 0,5 (95%IC 0,3-0,8). O número de indivíduos com atrofia moderada para intensa foi pequeno (n=6;4%), dos quais 66,7% tinham diminuição dos níveis de PGI. IBP significantemente aumentou os níveis de G-17 e PGI, exceto nas atrofias de corpo e multifocal que não apresentaram aumento de PGI. CONCLUSÃO: O painel gástrico não teve alta sensibilidade de indicar gastrite atrófica.

Robotic endoscopy. A review of the literature

Abstract Purpose To present new endoscopic robotic devices in the context of minimally invasive procedures with high precision and automation. Methods Review of the literature by December 2018 on robotic endoscopy. Results We present the studies and investments for robotic implementation and flexible endoscopy evolution. We divided them into forceps manipulation platforms, active endoscopy and endoscopic capsule. They try to improve forceps handling and stability and to promote active movement. Conclusion The implementation and propagation of robotic models depend on doing what the endoscopist is unable to. The new devices are moving forward in this direction.