[Diagnosis of severity as a basic parameter in the treatment of acute biliary pancreatitis]. / La diagnosi di gravità come parametro fondamentale per il trattamento della pancreatite acuta biliare.

BACKGROUND: Acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) still retains high morbidity (15-50%) and mortality (20-35%). Therefore it appears to be crucial to clearly assess the aetiological factors (50% of idiopathic are in fact biliary pancreatitis) and to establish their severity in order to plan the appropriate treatment. METHODS: 58 ABP patients were diagnosed by ultrasound (77.5%) or by laboratory findings (22.4%). Following Ranson and APACHE II scoring 17 cases (29.3%) were classified as severe, 41 (70.6%) as mild. All patients with severe ABP, had emergency ERCP + ES (within 24-48 hrs) followed by LC (< or = 10 days). Patients with mild ABP had LC within 10 days; in these cases IOC was always done. RESULTS: In severe cases operative endoscopy cured pancreatic inflammation in 12 cases. Subsequent LC never showed serious morbidity, apart from subcutaneous emphysema in one case. In 5 cases laparotomy was required since pancreatic necrosis was present, with 60% mortality. In patients with mild pancreatitis LC was successfully performed in all cases, with 7.3% morbidity. IOC showed choledochal stones in 31.7% of cases, while in severe cases stones in the biliary tree were shown in 88.2% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion ABP treatment is always surgical, and almost always with minimally-invasive procedures in severe cases (ERCP + ES with LC < or = 10 days) if surgery is performed within 24-48 hrs as well as in mild cases (LC + IOC) when surgery is done within 10 days.

[Treatment of acute biliary pancreatitis in the aged in the endolaparoscopic era]. / Il trattamento della pancreatite acuta biliare nell'anziano nell'era endolaparoscopica.

BACKGROUND: Acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) still retains high morbidity (15-50%) and mortality (20-35%). Therefore it appears to be crucial to clearly assess the aetiological factors (50% of idiopathic are in fact biliary pancreatitis) and to establish the severity in order to plan the appropriate treatment. METHODS: In this study we have considered 61 patients divided into 2 groups. Group 1 had 29 ABP patients aging less than 65 years, group 232 patients aging more than 65 years; the diagnosis was made by ultrasound and serological values in 78.5% of cases, while in the remaining 21.5% was only serological. Following Ranson and APACHE II scoring 18 cases (29.5%) were classified as severe [6 (20.6%) in group 1; 12 (37.5%) in group 2: p < 0.01], 43 (70.4%) as mild. All patients with severe ABP had emergency ERCP + ES (within 24-48 hrs) followed by LC (< or = 10 days). Patients with mild ABP had LC within 10 days; in these cases IOC was always done. RESULTS: In severe cases operative endoscopy cured pancreatic inflammation in 13 cases. Subsequent LC never showed serious morbidity, apart subcutaneous emphysema in one case. In 5 cases laparotomy was required since pancreatic necrosis was present, with 60% mortality. In patients with mild pancreatitis LC was successfully performed in all cases, with 6.9% morbidity. IOC showed choledochal stones in 32.5% of cases, while in severe cases stones in the biliary tree were showed in 88.8% of cases. No significant differences were detected between group 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion ABP treatment is always surgical, and almost always with minimally-invasive procedures in severe cases (ERCP + ES with LC < or = 10 days) if surgery is performed within 24-48 hrs as well as in mild cases (LC + IOC) when surgery is done within 10 days, independently from the age of the patients.

[Endoscopic treatment of the "cul de sac" syndrome: our experience]. / Il trattamento endoscopico della sindrome del "cul di sacco": nostra esperienza.

The "Sump Syndrome" represents a known late complication not easily recognizable within the interventions of CDS and L-L CDS. Its incidence ranges from 0% to 9.6% according to the literature. Up to ten years ago the "Sump Syndrome" treatment was mostly surgical. Currently endoscopic treatment reduces considerably the operative risk and the number, frequency and severity of complications. The technique consists of an endoscopic papillosphincterotomy with removal of calculus, gall mud, alimentary fragments and restoration of a satisfactory flow towards the duodenum. From January 1985 to October 1993, 492 ERCP were performed in Popoli's Hospital Digestive Department with an overall success rate of 92% and a selective incannulation success rate of 87%. Endoscopic treatment was used in 56% of the cases (319 patients) with 90% of success; 271 patients (35%) with lithiasic pathology were examined and 35 (12.9%) of them presented the "Sump Syndrome". Six patients underwent operation, 2 had no treatment and 27 underwent endoscopic treatment. In 21 cases an endoscopic papillotomy was performed and in 6 cases a bile-duct washing or calculi fragmentation was assured; 21 patients recovered completely while 6 patients still refer a painful-dyspeptic symptomatology with occasional colics which could be related to phenomena of chronic pancreatitis. The clinical experience allowed us to positively evaluate the endoscopic treatment of the "Sump Syndrome" since it carries a low mortality and morbidity rate and, furthermore, it is easily repeatable.

[Acute biliary pancreatitis: mini-invasive treatment]. / Pancreatite acuta biliare: trattamento mini-invasivo.

Acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) still retains high morbidity (15-50%) and mortality (20-35%). Therefore it appears to be crucial clearly assessing the aetiological factors (50% of idiopathic are in fact biliary pancreatitis) and establishing the severity in order to plan the appropriate treatment. Forty-nine ABP patients were diagnosed by ultrasound (75.5%) or by laboratory findings (22.5%). Following Ranson and APACHE II scoring, 15 cases (30.6%) were classified as severe, 34 (69.3%) as mild. All patients with severe ABP had emergency ERCP + ES (within 24-48 hours) followed by LC (< or = 10 days). Patients with mild ABP had LC within 10 days; in these cases IOC was always done. In severe cases operative endoscopy cured pancreatic inflammation in 11 cases. Subsequent LC never showed serious morbidity, but subcutaneous emphysema in one case. In 4 cases laparotomy was required since pancreatic necrosis was present, with 75% mortality. In patients with mild pancreatitis LC was successfully performed in all cases, with 8.8% morbidity. IOC showed choledochal stones in 32.5% of cases, while in severe cases stones in the biliary tree were showed in 80% of cases. In conclusion ABP treatment is always surgical, and almost always with minimally-invasive procedures in severe cases (ERCP + ES with LC < or = 10 days) if surgery is performed within 24-48 hours as well as in mild cases (LC + IOC) when surgery is done within 10 days.

[The endoscopic diagnosis of rectorrhagias]. / Diagnostica endoscopica delle rettorragie.

The diagnosis of bleeding of gastrointestinal low tract is still a very controversial subject. At the Service of Digestive Endoscopy of Popoli (PE) Hospital, in a period of 4 years, 2074 colonoscopies have been effected. In 640 cases, that is 30.8%, the indication for the exam was suggested by rectal bleeding. In the 566 patients examined for minor rectal bleeding, the most frequent lesions were: haemorrhoids (35.3%), polyps (15.2%), malignant neoplastic disease (9.3%). In all active rectal haemorrhages (14 massive, 41 medium) an urgent colonoscopy has been carried out with a percentage of success of 90%; in the 20 cases of unexplained melena, colonoscopy has not led to a diagnosis; in the 14 patients with unexplained anemia, colonoscopy has shown 2 carcinomas, whereas in the 5 cases with occult blood in stools it has been diagnostic in the percentage of 60%. We have ascertained that, when barium enema was effected before colonoscopy, the diagnostic agreement between the two examinations was only of 21.4 (9/42); on the contrary there was an agreement of 95% when colonoscopy was effected before barium enema. In accordance with Siewert and Blum (25), Ottenjann (24) and Farrands (42), we believe that colonoscopy should be considered the main examination after either major or minor rectal bleeding, because it is a quick and safe investigation with high diagnostic specificity and sensitivity. We refuse William's position (41), because, even in presence of haemorrhoids or anal fissures, the colon must be studied as a whole, especially in a period when neoplastic disease of this tract of intestine is considerably increasing.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)