Long-term impact of gastropexy on use of acid-reducing medication, second operations for gastroesophageal reflux and subjective reflux symptoms after sleeve gastrectomy.

We investigated whether adding gastropexy to sleeve gastrectomy (SG) reduced gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in patients operated for severe obesity, assessed mainly by use of anti-reflux medication (ARM) and second operations due to GERD worsening. In a prospective non-randomized study, patients undergoing SG at two Norwegian hospitals were included from 2011 to 2015 and followed for 7 years. GERD was defined by regular use of ARM, and epigastric pain and heartburn were measured by the Rome II questionnaire. Gastropexy was done by suturing the gastrocolic ligament to the staple line. Patients undergoing SG only, mainly before gastropexia was introduced in 2013, were compared to those with additional gastropexy from 2013 onwards. Of 376 included patients (75% females, mean age 42.6 years and BMI 42.9 kg/m2 ), 350 (93%) and 232 (62%) were available for evaluation after 1 and 7 years, respectively. Baseline characteristics in the no-gastropexy (n = 235) and gastropexy groups (n = 141) were similar. In patients without ARM use before surgery, the use increased and in those that used ARM at baseline, the proportion decreased, with no difference in the no-gastropexy and gastropexy groups. With a combined endpoint of ARM use and/or second operation for GERD, there was no difference during follow-up between the two groups. With time, adding gastropexy did not reduce symptoms of GERD significantly. In this population, adding gastropexy to SG did not reduce use of ARM and/or second operation for uncontrolled GERD, epigastric pain or heartburn during the first 7 postoperative years.

EFSUMB Recommendations for Gastrointestinal Ultrasound Part 3: Endorectal, Endoanal and Perineal Ultrasound.

This article represents part 3 of the EFSUMB Recommendations and Guidelines for Gastrointestinal Ultrasound (GIUS). It provides an overview of the examination techniques recommended by experts in the field of endorectal/endoanal ultrasound (ERUS/EAUS), as well as perineal ultrasound (PNUS). The most important indications are rectal tumors and inflammatory diseases like fistula and abscesses in patients with or without inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). PNUS sometimes is more flexible and convenient compared to ERUS. However, the technique of ERUS is quite well established, especially for the staging of rectal cancer. EAUS also gained ground in the evaluation of perianal diseases like fistulas, abscesses and incontinence. For the staging of perirectal tumors, the use of PNUS in addition to conventional ERUS could be recommended. For the staging of anal carcinomas, PNUS can be a good option because of the higher resolution. Both ERUS and PNUS are considered excellent guidance methods for invasive interventions, such as the drainage of fluids or targeted biopsy of tissue lesions. For abscess detection and evaluation, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) also helps in therapy planning.

Endorectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for staging of early rectal cancers: how well does it work in practice?

BACKGROUND: Rectal tumor treatment strategies are individually tailored based on tumor stage, and yield different rates of posttreatment morbidity, mortality, and local recurrence. Therefore, the accuracy of pretreatment staging is highly important. Here we investigated the accuracy of staging by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) in a clinical setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 500 patients were examined at the rectal cancer outpatient clinic at Haukeland University Hospital between October 2014 and January 2018. This study included only cases in which the resection specimen had a histopathological staging of adenoma or early rectal cancer (pT1-pT2). Patients with previous pelvic surgery or preoperative radiotherapy were excluded. The 145 analyzed patients were preoperatively examined via biopsy (n = 132), digital rectal examination (n = 77), rigid rectoscopy (n = 127), ERUS (n = 104), real-time elastography (n = 96), and MRI (n = 84). RESULTS: ERUS distinguished between adenomas and early rectal cancer with 88% accuracy (95% CI: 0.68-0.96), while MRI achieved 75% accuracy (95% CI: 0.54-0.88). ERUS tended to overstage T1 tumors as T2-T3 (16/24). MRI overstaged most adenomas to T1-T2 tumors (18/22). Neither ERUS nor MRI distinguished between T1 and T2 tumors. CONCLUSIONS: In a clinical setting, ERUS differentiated between benign and malignant tumors with high accuracy. The present findings support previous reports that ERUS and MRI have low accuracy for T-staging of early rectal cancer. We recommend that MRI be routinely combined with ERUS for the clinical examination of rectal tumors, since MRI consistently overstaged adenomas as cancer. In adenomas, MRI had no additional benefit for preoperative staging.