EUS-guided gallbladder drainage as second option of biliary decompression after failed ERCP for the management of malignant distal biliary obstruction.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is recommended as a rescue treatment of malignant distal biliary obstruction (MBDO) after failed ERCP and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD). A 64-year-old male was admitted for painless obstructive jaundice and anemia. For religious reasons, he refused any blood transfusions. Abdominal computed tomography scan showed a pancreatic tumor with dilation biliary tree and liver metastasis. ERCP failed and advanced biliary cannulation technique such as precut were avoided due to a high risk of bleeding. We avoided the two transmural EUS-BD approaches, which include EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy and EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy, due to smaller targets and considered riskier in this patient. Since the gallbladder was markedly distended and the cystic duct was patent, we performed a cholecystogastrostomy with a 15x10 mm electrocautery lumen-apposing metal stent (EC-LAMS) as a second option of biliary drainage. After a week, the serum bilirubin levels decreased to normal values and the patient was uneventfully discharged. At follow-up, he refused to receive chemotherapy and died six months later due to cancer progression.

Normal values for water-perfused esophageal high-resolution manometry.

BACKGROUND: Normal values for water-perfused esophageal high-resolution manometry have still not been established in our environment, despite its generalized use and the recommendation to determine reference values for each Motility Unit based on their equipment. Normal values established with solid-state highresolution manometry are currently being used as reference values for water-perfused high-resolution manometry. OBJECTIVES: To obtain normal values for water-perfused esophageal high-resolution manometry, based on the esophageal motility analysis of healthy subjects. METHODS: 16 healthy volunteers without history of digestive complaints or esophageal symptoms were included. 22-channel water-perfused high-resolution manometry was performed. RESULTS: Normal values were calculated as 5th-95th percentile ranges for the following parameters; upper esophageal sphincter resting pressure (UESRP) (40-195 mmHg); upper esophageal sphincter residual pressure (UESResP) (30-115 mmHg), contractile front velocity (CFV) (2.4-7.1 cm/s), distal contractile integral (DCI) (285-2820 mmHg.s.cm), distal contraction latency (DL) (6.1-10.9 s), intrabolus pressure (IBP) (7-19 mmHg), integrated relaxation pressure (IRP 4s) (2-20 mmHg), lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure(LESRP) (5-54 mmHg), esophageal shortening (Es) (0.3-1.3 cm) and lower esophageal sphincter lift (LESL) (0,1-1,2 cm). CONCLUSION: Normal values for the most important parameters (such as IRP 4s, DL and CFV), obtained using a 22-channel waterperfused system resemble previously published data from other perfusion devices. However, there exist small but significant variations compared with values established with solid-state highresolution manometry. Thus, when using water-perfused catheters, caution is required when normative values are used that were established with solid-state catheters.

Valores de referencia de manometría esofágica de alta resolución mediante sistema de perfusión / Normal values for water-perfused esophageal high-resolution manometry

ANTECEDENTES: los valores de referencia de la manometría esofágica de alta resolución mediante sistema de perfusión aún no han sido establecidos en nuestro medio, a pesar de su empleo generalizado en múltiples Unidades de Motilidad y la recomendación de determinar valores de referencia propios de cada Unidad en función de sus equipos. Actualmente se utilizan como referencia los valores de normalidad de la manometría de alta resolución en estado sólido. OBJETIVOS: el objetivo de este estudio es establecer los valores de normalidad para la manometría de alta resolución de perfusión de 22 canales a partir del análisis de la motilidad esofágica de individuos sanos. MÉTODOS: se incluyeron 16 voluntarios sanos, sin patología digestiva ni síntomas esofágicos, a los que se realizó una manometría de alta resolución mediante sistema de perfusión de 22 canales. RESULTADOS: los datos vienen referidos como la media y el rango comprendido entre los percentiles 5 y 95. Los percentiles 5 y 95 de cada uno de los parámetros fueron de 40-195 mmHg para la presión de reposo del esfínter esofágico superior (PRESS), 30-115 mmHg para la presión residual del esfínter esofágico superior (PResEES), 2,4-7,1 cm/s para la velocidad de frente contráctil (VFC), 285-2.820 mmHg.s.cm para la integral contráctil distal (ICD), 6,1-10,9 s para la latencia distal (LD), 7-19 mmHg para la presión intrabolo (PIB), 2-20 mmHg para la presión de relajación integrada a los 4 segundos (PRI4s) y 5-54 mmHg para la presión de reposo del esfínter esofágico inferior (PREEI). Los percentiles 5 y 95 del acortamiento esofágico (aE) fueron 0,3-1,3 cm y del ascenso del esfínter esofágico inferior (aEEI) 0,1-1,2 cm. CONCLUSIÓN: los rangos de normalidad obtenidos mediante sistema de perfusión de 22 canales para los parámetros manométricos más importantes (PRI4s, LD, VFC) son similares a los previamente publicados con equipos de perfusión, existiendo variaciones pequeñas, pero significativas, respecto a los valores establecidos por equipos de estado sólido

BACKGROUND: Normal values for water-perfused esophageal high-resolution manometry have still not been established in our environment, despite its generalized use and the recommendation to determine reference values for each Motility Unit based on their equipment. Normal values established with solid-state highresolution manometry are currently being used as reference values for water-perfused high-resolution manometry. OBJECTIVES: To obtain normal values for water-perfused esophageal high-resolution manometry, based on the esophageal motility analysis of healthy subjects. METHODS: 16 healthy volunteers without history of digestive complaints or esophageal symptoms were included. 22-channel water-perfused high-resolution manometry was performed. RESULTS: Normal values were calculated as 5th-95th percentile ranges for the following parameters; upper esophageal sphincter resting pressure (UESRP) (40-195 mmHg); upper esophageal sphincter residual pressure (UESResP) (30-115 mmHg), contractile front velocity (CFV) (2.4-7.1 cm/s), distal contractile integral (DCI) (285-2820 mmHg.s.cm), distal contraction latency (DL) (6.1-10.9 s), intrabolus pressure (IBP) (7-19 mmHg), integrated relaxation pressure (IRP 4s) (2-20 mmHg), lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (LESRP) (5-54 mmHg), esophageal shortening (Es) (0.3-1.3 cm) and lower esophageal sphincter lift (LESL) (0,1-1,2 cm). CONCLUSION: Normal values for the most important parameters (such as IRP 4s, DL and CFV), obtained using a 22-channel waterperfused system resemble previously published data from other perfusion devices. However, there exist small but significant variations compared with values established with solid-state highresolution manometry. Thus, when using water-perfused catheters, caution is required when normative values are used that were established with solid-state catheters

[Hemoconcentration, Apache II and Ranson as early predictors of severity in patients with acute pancreatitis in a hospital in Lima - Peru]. / Hemoconcentración, Apache II y Ranson como predictores tempranos de severidad en pacientes con diagnóstico de pancreatitis aguda en un Hospital de Lima - Perú

OBJECTIVE: Compare hemoconcetration, APACHE II and Ranson scores as early predictors of severity defined by Atlanta criteria in patients with acute pancreatitis at Hospital Nacional Cayetano Heredia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective descriptive study between December 2009 to November 2010 done using a data collection sheet to gather study relevant information. We classified acute pancreatitis into mild or severe according to Atlanta symposium criteria for organ failure and/or local complications. Comparison of hematocrit values was made using a t Student test to detect a significant difference and the area below the ROC curve was analyzed. RESULTS: Counting with 151 patients, 103 women (68.2%), with mean age of 45.5 ± 19.17 years, 112 mild pancreatitis (74.2%) and 39 severe (25.8%). Mean hematocrit in mild cases was 38.40 ± 4.77% and 39.78 ± 7.35% in severe group with p equal to 0.182. Area below the ROC curve of 0.89 y 0.68 for APACHE II and Ranson scores respectively. CONCLUSION: Hemoconcentration and Ranson proved not to be as useful as APACHE II score in predicting severity in acute pancreatitis.

Hemoconcentración, apache II y ranson como predictores tempranos de severidad en pacientes con diagnóstico de pancreatitis aguda en un Hospital de Lima - Perú / Hemoconcentration, apache II and ranson as early predictors of severity in patients with acute pancreatitis in a hospital in Lima - Peru

OBJETIVO: Comparar hemoconcentración y sistemas de puntuación APACHE II y Ranson como predictores tempranos de severidad determinada por criterios de Atlanta en pacientes con diagnóstico de Pancreatitis Aguda en el Hospital Nacional Cayetano Heredia. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: Estudio descriptivo retrospectivo entre diciembre del 2009 a noviembre del 2010 con una ficha de recolección de datos para obtener la información relevante. Se clasificó los cuadros de pancreatitis aguda en leve y severa en base a los criterios de falla orgánica y/o complicaciones locales según el Simposio de Atlanta. Para la comparación del valor de hematocrito se realizó la prueba t de Student para evaluar una diferencia significativa y se elaboró la curva ROC para las áreas bajo la curva. RESULTADOS: Ingresaron al estudio 151 pacientes, 103 mujeres (68.2%), edad promedio de 45.5 ± 19.17 años, 112 pancreatitis leves (74.2%) y 39 severas (25.8%). El hematocrito promedio en los casos leves fue de 38.40 ± 4.77%, y 39.78 ± 7.35% en los severos con p igual a 0.182. Se encontró un área bajo la curva de 0.89 y 0.68 para score APACHE II y Ranson, respectivamente. CONCLUSIÓN: Hemoconcentración y Ranson no son buenos predictores de severidad comparados con el APACHE II en Pancreatitis Aguda.

OBJECTIVE: Compare hemoconcetration, APACHE II and Ranson scores as early predictors of severity defined by Atlanta criteria in patients with acute pancreatitis at Hospital Nacional Cayetano Heredia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective descriptive study between December 2009 to November 2010 done using a data collection sheet to gather study relevant information. We classified acute pancreatitis into mild or severe according to Atlanta symposium criteria for organ failure and/or local complications. Comparison of hematocrit values was made using a t Student test to detect a significant difference and the area below the ROC curve was analyzed. RESULTS: Counting with 151 patients, 103 women (68.2%), with mean age of 45.5 ± 19.17 years, 112 mild pancreatitis (74.2%) and 39 severe (25.8%). Mean hematocrit in mild cases was 38.40 ± 4.77% and 39.78 ± 7.35% in severe group with p equal to 0.182. Area below the ROC curve of 0.89 y 0.68 for APACHE II and Ranson scores respectively. CONCLUSION: Hemoconcentration and Ranson proved not to be as useful as APACHE II score in predicting severity in acute pancreatitis.