Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
ACG Case Rep J ; 10(5): e01043, 2023 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37168507

RESUMO

Afferent loop syndrome can result from both benign and malignant strictures of the biliary limbs of patients with surgically altered anatomy. Afflicted patients accumulate intestinal and pancreaticobiliary secretions, which leads to bowel distention and pain. We describe the endoscopic management of a 52-year-old woman with a history of Billroth II gastrojejunostomy due to gastric cancer who developed malignant gastric outlet obstruction and subsequently malignant afferent loop syndrome, using lumen-apposing metal stents.

2.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 86(1): 107-117.e1, 2017 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28174123

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lower GI bleeding (LGIB) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality. Colonoscopy is indicated in all hospitalized patients with LGIB, yet the time frame for performing colonoscopy remains unclear. Prior studies of outcomes in urgent versus elective colonoscopy have yielded conflicting results and were often underpowered. Our study objective was to compare several outcomes between urgent and elective colonoscopy in patients hospitalized for LGIB. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis were performed on studies that compared urgent and elective colonoscopy in patients with LGIB. Pooled rates were calculated for specific outcomes, and rate ratios were determined for selected comparison groups. RESULTS: Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, with a total sample size of 10,172 patients in the urgent colonoscopy arm and 14,224 patients in the elective colonoscopy arm. Urgent colonoscopy was associated with increased use of endoscopic therapeutic intervention (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.08-2.67). There were no significant differences in bleeding source localization (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, .92-1.25), adverse event rates (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, .65-1.71), rebleeding rates (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, .74-1.78), transfusion requirement (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, .73-1.41), or mortality (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, .45-3.02). CONCLUSIONS: Urgent colonoscopy appears to be safe and well tolerated, but there is no clear evidence that it alters important clinical outcomes.


Assuntos
Colonoscopia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/diagnóstico por imagem , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/terapia , Transfusão de Sangue , Colonoscopia/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Emergências , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/mortalidade , Humanos , Tempo de Internação/economia , Recidiva
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...