The ideal technique for processing SpyBite tissue specimens: a prospective, single-blinded, pilot-study of histology and cytology techniques.

Background and study aims Diagnostic sensitivity for indeterminate biliary lesions remains suboptimal. Cytology techniques may mitigate the impediment of small cholangioscopic specimens. Our primary aim was to compare cell block cytology (CB) with standard histology for foregut SpyBite (SB) specimens. Our secondary aim was to assess CB in biliary SB biopsies. Patients and methods This was a two-phase prospective pilot study. In phase one, a prospective pilot study, foregut SB specimens from three sites (4 per site per patient per processing technique) were allocated to CB or histology, and assessed by a single, blinded pathologist. The gold standard comprised two standard forceps (CFB) histological specimens per site per patient. Specimen ease of processing, size and number, adequacy for diagnosis and artefact were evaluated. In phase two, CB was used for consecutive patients with indeterminate biliary lesions, and compared with phase one CB results. Results In phase one, 240 SB foregut biopsies were performed in 10 patients, 227 specimens recorded by pathologist. Specimen origin was identified in 100 % and 97 % of histology and CB batches respectively. Specimens were significantly larger in the histology group (2.02 mm vs 1.49 mm, P  < 0.05). There was a trend to less crush artifact with CB, and no difference in processing difficulty. In phase two, 11 patients (63.0 ±12.7 years, 91 % female) underwent SpyGlass (SG) assessment of suspected indeterminate stricture (n = 8) or mass (n = 3), and six underwent SB. All CB specimens were adequate for diagnosis. Specimen parameters were not significantly different from luminal CB outcomes. Conclusions In this pilot study, cell block cytology showed similar results as histological analysis of SpyBite specimens in the analysis of biliary stricture.

Double-balloon enteroscopy-assisted dilatation avoids surgery for small bowel strictures: A systematic review.

AIM: To evaluate the therapeutic role of double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) in small bowel strictures and to propose a standard approach to small bowel strictures. METHODS: Systematic review of studies involving DBE in patients with small bowel strictures. Only studies limited to small bowel strictures were included and those with ileo-colonic strictures were excluded. RESULTS: In total 13 studies were included, in which 310 patients were dilated. The average follow-up time was 31.8 mo per patient. The complication rate was 4.8% per patient and 2.6% per dilatation. Surgery was avoided in 80% of patients. After the first dilatation, 46% were treated with re-dilatation and only 17% required surgery. CONCLUSION: DBE-assisted dilatation avoids surgery in 80% of patients with small bowel strictures and is safe and effective. We propose a standardized approach to small bowel strictures.

Intravenous proton pump inhibitor use in hospital practice.

AIM: North American studies suggest that intravenous proton pump inhibitors are used inappropriately in hospital practice, but little is known of prescribing patterns in Europe. Our aim was to examine intravenous proton pump inhibitors prescribing in a single university teaching hospital. METHODS: Observational study of 101 consecutive hospital patients administered intravenous proton pump inhibitors over a 3-month period in a single hospital in Dublin, Ireland. Demographic, clinical, biochemical, haematological, endoscopic and follow-up data were collected and analysed. RESULTS: Sixty-five percent (65 of 101) of the patients had no objective evidence of gastrointestinal blood loss and 85 were haemodynamically stable before treatment. Two patients underwent endoscopic haemostasis before IV administration. The remaining 99 were treated for ulcer prophylaxis, presumed gastrointestinal haemorrhage, unrelated gastrointestinal conditions or for unknown reasons. Relatively senior nonconsultant staff prescribed intravenous therapy in most cases. Only six patients in the study were deemed to have received intravenous therapy for an appropriate indication. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous proton pump inhibitors use in hospital practice is usually inappropriate. It may be that other valid indications exist within hospital practice, but these might reasonably be evaluated in randomized trials that would assess the risks and costs of intravenous treatments as well as their benefits.