Tricobezoar gástrico: reporte de un caso y revisión de la literatura

El bezoar gástrico es una tumoración por cuerpo extraño que resulta de la acumulación de material no digerible en el estómago. El tricobezoar es uno de ellos y frecuentemente se presenta en la población femenina joven que padece trastornos psiquiátricos. La presentación del bezoar gástrico es insidiosa e inespecífica, teniendo un curso inicialmente asintomático por años, hasta que alcanza un tamaño que evidencia síntomas. El método diagnóstico de elección es la endoscopía, ya que permite visualizar el bezoar y plantear el tratamiento. El abordaje terapéutico estará determinado por el tipo, tamaño y consistencia de este; sin embargo, la resolución quirúrgica es la de elección, la cual siempre debe estar asociada a tratamiento psiquiátrico para prevenir la recurrencia del cuadro. Se presenta el caso de una paciente de 19 años con el diagnóstico de tricobezoar gástrico, asociado a tricotilomanía y tricofagia como patologías de fondo, y se realiza una revisión de la literatura.

A gastric bezoar is a foreign body tumor that results from the accumulation of indigestible material in the stomach. The trichobezoar is one of them and frequently occurs in the young female population suffering from psychiatric disorders. The presentation of the gastric bezoar is insidious and nonspecific, having an initially asymptomatic course for years, until it reaches a size that shows symptoms. The diagnostic method of choice is endoscopy since it allows the bezoar to be visualized and propose the treatment. The therapeutic approach will be determined by its type, size, and consistency; however, surgical resolution is the one of choice, which must always be associated with psychiatric treatment to prevent recurrence of the condition. The case of a 19-year-old patient with a diagnosis of gastric trichobezoar, associated with trichotillomania and trichophagia as underlying pathologies is presented, and a literature review is carried out.

[Gastric trichobezoar: case report and literature review]. / Tricobezoar gástrico: reporte de un caso y revisión de la literatura.

A gastric bezoar is a foreign body tumor that results from the accumulation of indigestible material in the stomach. The trichobezoar is one of them and frequently occurs in the young female population suffering from psychiatric disorders. The presentation of the gastric bezoar is insidious and nonspecific, having an initially asymptomatic course for years, until it reaches a size that shows symptoms. The diagnostic method of choice is endoscopy since it allows the bezoar to be visualized and propose the treatment. The therapeutic approach will be determined by its type, size, and consistency; however, surgical resolution is the one of choice, which must always be associated with psychiatric treatment to prevent recurrence of the condition. The case of a 19-year-old patient with a diagnosis of gastric trichobezoar, associated with trichotillomania and trichophagia as underlying pathologies is presented, and a literature review is carried out.

Prevalence of metastasis and survival of 788 patients with T1 rectal carcinoid tumors.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Prevalence of rectal carcinoids is increasing, partly because of increased colorectal cancer screening. Local excision (endoscopic or transanal excision) is usually performed for small (<1-2 cm) rectal carcinoids, but data on clinical outcomes from large population-based U.S. studies are lacking. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of metastasis of resected small rectal carcinoid tumors using a large national cancer database and to evaluate the long-term survival of patients after local resection as compared with radical surgery. METHODS: The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database was used to identify 788 patients with rectal T1 carcinoids <2 cm in size. Prevalence of metastases at initial diagnosis and risk factors for metastases were analyzed. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 727 patients (92.3%) had tumors ≤10 mm in diameter and 61 (7.7%) had tumors 11 to 19 mm. Overall, 12 patients (1.5%) had metastasis at the time of diagnosis with prevalence of 1.1% in lesions ≤10 mm and 6.6% in lesions 11 to 19 mm (P = .01). Survival of patients with T1 rectal carcinoids without metastasis was significantly better than those with metastasis (5-year CSS of 100% vs 78%, P < .001). Of 559 patients with T1N0M0 rectal carcinoids ≤10 mm, 5-year CSS was 100% in both groups who underwent local excision and those who underwent radical surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Larger T1 rectal carcinoid tumors (11-19 mm) have significantly higher risk of lymph node metastases compared with those ≤10 mm. Survival is worse with metastatic disease. Local therapy is adequate for T1N0M0 rectal carcinoids ≤10 mm in size with excellent long-term outcomes.

Retraction notice to "Long-term outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy in patients with achalasia with a minimum follow-up of 2 years: an international multicenter study": [YMGE 85 (2017) 927-933].

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal). This article has been retracted due to overlapping/duplicate material. Data from some patients from this study have previously been published in other journals without cross-referencing. Twenty patients overlap with a paper by Kumbhari et al.1 Thirty-five patients overlap with the study by Ngamruengphong et al.2.

Comprehensive Analysis of Adverse Events Associated With Per Oral Endoscopic Myotomy in 1826 Patients: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: The safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is still debated since comprehensive analysis of adverse events (AEs) associated with the procedure in large multicenter cohort studies has not been performed. To study (1) the prevalence of AEs and (2) factors associated with occurrence of AEs in patients undergoing POEM. METHODS: Patients who underwent POEM at 12 tertiary-care centers between 2009 and 2015 were included in this case-control study. Cases were defined by the occurrence of any AE related to the POEM procedure. Control patients were selected for each AE case by matching for age, gender, and disease classification (achalasia type I and II vs. type III/spastic esophageal disorders). RESULTS: A total of 1,826 patients underwent POEM. Overall, 156 AEs occurred in 137 patients (7.5%). A total of 51 (2.8%) inadvertent mucosotomies occurred. Mild, moderate, and severe AEs had a frequency of 116 (6.4%), 31 (1.7%), and 9 (0.5%), respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sigmoid-type esophagus (odds ratio (OR) 2.28, P=0.05), endoscopist experience <20 cases (OR 1.98, P=0.04), use of a triangular tip knife (OR 3.22, P=0.05), and use of an electrosurgical current different than spray coagulation (OR 3.09, P=0.02) were significantly associated with the occurrence of AEs. CONCLUSIONS: This large study comprehensively assessed the safety of POEM and highly suggests POEM as a relatively safe procedure when performed by experts at tertiary centers with an overall 7.5% prevalence of AEs. Severe AEs are rare. Sigmoid-type esophagus, endoscopist experience, type of knife, and current used can be considered as predictive factors of AE occurrence.

Efficacy and Safety of Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for Treatment of Achalasia After Failed Heller Myotomy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In patients with persistent symptoms after Heller myotomy (HM), treatment options include repeat HM, pneumatic dilation, or peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of POEM in patients with achalasia with prior HM vs without prior HM. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 180 patients with achalasia who underwent POEM at 13 tertiary centers worldwide, from December 2009 through September 2015. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those with prior HM (HM group, exposure; n = 90) and those without prior HM (non-HM group; n = 90). Clinical response was defined by a decrease in Eckardt scores to 3 or less. Adverse events were graded according to criteria set by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Technical success, clinical success, and rates of adverse events were compared between groups. Patients were followed up for a median of 8.5 months. RESULTS: POEM was technically successful in 98% of patients in the HM group and in 100% of patients in the non-HM group (P = .49). A significantly lower proportion of patients in the HM group had a clinical response to POEM (81%) than in the non-HM group (94%; P = .01). There were no significant differences in rates of adverse events between the groups (8% in the HM group vs 13% in the non-HM group; P = .23). Symptomatic reflux and reflux esophagitis after POEM were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: POEM is safe and effective for patients with achalasia who were not treated successfully by prior HM. Although the rate of clinical success in patients with prior HM is lower than in those without prior HM, the safety profile of POEM is comparable between groups.

Long-term outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy in patients with achalasia with a minimum follow-up of 2 years: an international multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has shown promising safety and efficacy in short-term studies. However, long-term follow-up data are very limited. The aims of this study were to assess (1) clinical outcome of patients with a minimum post-POEM follow-up of 2 years and (2) factors associated with long-term clinical failure after POEM. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed that included all consecutive patients with achalasia who underwent POEM with a minimum follow-up of 2 years at 10 tertiary-care centers. Clinical response was defined by a decrease in Eckardt score to 3 or lower. RESULTS: A total of 205 patients (45.8% men; mean age, 49 years) were followed for a median of 31 months (interquartile range, 26-38 months). Of these, 81 patients (39.5%) had received previous treatment for achalasia before POEM. Clinical success was achieved in 98% (185/189), 98% (142/144), and 91% (187/205) of patients with follow-up within 6 months, at 12 months, and ≥24 months, respectively. Of 185 patients with clinical response at 6 months, 11 (6%) experienced recurrent symptoms at 2 years. History of previous pneumatic dilation was associated with long-term treatment failure (odds ratio, 3.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-9.23). Procedure-related adverse events occurred in 8.2% of patients and only 1 patient required surgical intervention. Abnormal esophageal acid exposure and reflux esophagitis were documented in 37.5% and 18% of patients, respectively. However, these rates are simply a reference number among a very selective group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: POEM is safe and provides high initial clinical success and excellent long-term outcomes. Among patients with confirmed clinical response within 6 months, 6% had recurrent symptoms by 2 years.

EUS-guided gastroenterostomy is comparable to enteral stenting with fewer re-interventions in malignant gastric outlet obstruction.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic enteral stenting (ES) in malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is limited by high rates of stent obstruction. EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel procedure that potentially offers sustained patency without tumor ingrowth/overgrowth. The aim of this study is to compare EUS-GE with ES in terms of (1) symptom recurrence and need for re-intervention, (2) technical success (proper stent positioning as determined via endoscopy and fluoroscopy), (3) clinical success (ability to tolerate oral intake without vomiting), and (4) procedure-related adverse events (AEs). METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study of all consecutive patients who underwent either EUS-GE at four centers between 2013 and 2015 or ES at one center between 2008 and 2010. RESULTS: A total of 82 patients (mean age 66-years ± 13.5 and 40.2% female) were identified: 30 in EUS-GE and 52 in ES. Technical and clinical success was not significantly different: 86.7% EUS-GE versus 94.2% ES (p = 0.2) and 83.3% EUS-GE versus 67.3% ES (p = 0.12), respectively. Symptom recurrence and need for re-intervention, however, was significantly lower in the EUS-GE group (4.0 vs. 28.6%, (p = 0.015). Post-procedure mean length of hospitalization was comparable at 11.3 days ± 6.6 for EUS-GE versus 9.5 days ± 8.3 for ES (p = 0.3). Rates and severity of AEs (as per the ASGE lexicon) were also similar (16.7 vs. 11.5%, p = 0.5). On multivariable analysis, ES was independently associated with need for re-intervention (OR 12.8, p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: EUS-GE may be ideal for malignant GOO with comparable effectiveness and safety to ES while being associated with fewer symptom recurrence and requirements for re-intervention.

An international multicenter study comparing EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage with enteroscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography after Whipple surgery.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic management of post-Whipple pancreatic adverse events (AEs) with enteroscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (e-ERP) is associated with high failure rates. EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) has shown promising results; however, no comparative data have been done for these 2 modalities. The goal of this study is to compare EUS-PDD with e-ERP in terms of technical success (PDD through dilation/stent), clinical success (improvement/resolution of pancreatic-type symptoms), and AE rates in patients with post-Whipple anatomy. METHODS: This is an international multicenter comparative retrospective study at 7 tertiary centers (2 United States, 2 European, 2 Asian, and 1 South American). All consecutive patients who underwent EUS-PDD or e-ERP between January 2010 and August 2015 were included. RESULTS: In total, 66 patients (mean age, 57 years; 48% women) and 75 procedures were identified with 40 in EUS-PDD and 35 in e-ERP. Technical success was achieved in 92.5% of procedures in the EUS-PDD group compared with 20% of procedures in the e-ERP group (OR, 49.3; P < .001). Clinical success (per patient) was attained in 87.5% of procedures in the EUS-PDD group compared with 23.1% in the e-ERP group (OR, 23.3; P < .001). AEs occurred more commonly in the EUS-PDD group (35% vs 2.9%, P < .001). However, all AEs were rated as mild or moderate. Procedure time and length of stay were not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-PDD is superior to e-ERP in post-Whipple anatomy in terms of efficacy with acceptable safety. As such, EUS-PDD should be considered as a potential first-line treatment in post-pancreaticoduodenectomy anatomy when necessary expertise is available.