Gastritis Cystica Profunda: A Rare Disease, a Challenging Diagnosis, and an Uncertain Malignant Potential: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.

Gastritis cystica profunda (GCP) has been defined as a rare submucosal benign gastric lesion with cystic gland growth. Due to its unclear etiopathogenesis, this lesion is often misdiagnosed and mistaken for other gastric masses. Currently, a standardized treatment for GCP lesions is still missing. Here, we illustrate a case of a patient admitted to our general surgery department for melena and general discomfort. No history of peptic ulcer or gastric surgery was present. Upper GI endoscopy was performed, showing a distal gastric lesion with a small ulceration on the top. CT-scan and endoscopic ultrasound confirmed the presence of the lesion, compatible with a gastric stromal tumor, without showing any eventual metastasis. Surgical gastric resection was performed. Histological findings were diagnostic for GCP, with cistically ectasic submucosal glands, chronic inflammation, eosinophilic infiltration and foveal hyperplasia. GCP is a very exceptional cause of upper-GI bleeding with specific histological features. Its diagnosis as well as its therapy are challenging, resulting in several pitfalls. Even though it is a rare entity, GCP should always be considered in the differential diagnosis of gastric submucosal lesions.

Intraoperative Cerebral Monitoring During Carotid Surgery: A Narrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Intra-operative neurological monitoring (IONM) during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) aims to reduce neurological morbidity of surgery. OBJECTIVE: This narrative review analyses the role and results of different methods of IONM. METHODS: review articles on PUBMED and Cochrane Library, by searching key words related to IONM and CEA, from 2000 up to date. RESULTS: regional anesthesia in some centers represents the "gold standard". The most often used alternative techniques are: stump pressure, electroencephalogram, somatosensory evoked potentials, transcranical doppler ultrasound, near infrared spectroscopy and routine shunting. Every technique shows limitations. Regional anesthesia can make difficult prompt intubation when needed. Stump pressure shows a wide operative range. Electroencephalogram is unable to detect ischemia in sub-cortical regions of the brain. Somatosensory evoked potentials certainly demonstrate the presence of cerebral ischemia, but are no more specific or sensitive than the electroencephalogram. Transcranical doppler monitoring is undoubtedly operator-dependent and suffers from the limitations that the probe has to be placed relatively near to the surgical site and may impede the operator, especially if it needs constant adjustments; moreover, an acoustic window may not be found in 10% -20% of the subjects. Near infrared spectroscopy appears to have a high negative predictive value for cerebral ischemia, but has a poor positive predictive value and low specificity, because predominantly estimates venous oxygenation as this makes up about 80% of cerebral blood volume. The data on the use of Routine Shunting (RS) from RCTs are limited. CONCLUSIONS: currently, with no clear consensus on monitoring technique, choice should be guided by local expertise and complication rates. With reflection, best practice may dictate that a standard technique is selected as suggested above and this remains the default position for individual practice. Nevertheless, current techniques for monitoring cerebral perfusion during CEA are associated with false negative and false positive resulting in inappropriate shunt insertion.