Detectability of Hygroscopic Clips Used in Breast Cancer Surgery.

Sonographically detectable clips were introduced over the last decade. We retrospectively studied the rate and duration of sonographically detectable clip detectability in patients with breast cancer who had sonographically detectable clips inserted over a 2-year period. Nine of 26 patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, with all clips remaining detectable 140 to 187 days after insertion. Six of the 9 had intraoperative sonographic localization, with 1 reoperation (17%). Eleven additional patients with nonpalpable tumors and sonographically detectable clips had intraoperative sonographic localization with 1 reoperation (9%). In 1 patient, a sonographically detectable clip enabled intraoperative identification of a suspicious lymph node. There were no complications or clip migration. Sonographically detectable clips are helpful in breast cancer surgery with and without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, remaining detectable for many months and often averting preoperative localization and scheduling difficulties.

Ultrasound evaluation of visceral and subcutaneous fat reduction in morbidly obese subjects undergoing laparoscopic gastric banding, sleeve gastrectomy, and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a prospective comparison study.

BACKGROUND: Visceral fat (VF) plays a major role in the development of metabolic syndrome associated with obesity. The aim of our study is to compare VF and subcutaneous fat (SCF) reduction measured by ultrasonography (US) after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and laparoscopic Roux-En-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). METHODS: Thirty-nine morbidly obese patients were prospectively evaluated by US before surgery and 3, 6, and 12 months following surgery to determine VF and SCF thickness. RESULTS: Three statistically comparable groups of morbidly obese patients underwent LRYGB (n = 13), LSG (n = 15), and LAGB (n = 11). The three groups did not differ in initial age, gender, body mass index (BMI), VF, or SCF. Final excess weight loss (EWL%) was highest after LSG and LRYGB followed by LAGB (81 ± 5.8 vs. 69.5 ± 4.5 vs. 43.4 ± 5.2, p < 0.001). LSG and LRYGB were significantly more efficient in VF reduction (ΔVF) compared with LAGB (7.1 ± 0.5 vs. 5.6 ± 0.6 vs. 3.6 ± 0.8, p = 0.004). SCF reduction (ΔSCF) was also highest after LSG followed by LRYGB and LAGB (3 ± 0.2 vs. 2.2 ± 0.4 vs. 1.9 ± 0.4, p = 0.08). The change in fat distribution, determined as Δ(VF/SCF), showed a preferential VF reduction in the LSG and LRYGB patients compared with patients that underwent LAGB (0.59 ± 0.1 vs. 0.52 ± 0.2 vs. 0.19 ± 0.2, p = 0.42). In a subgroup analysis comparing only LSG to LRYGB, no statistically significant difference was seen in EWL%, ΔVF, ΔSCF, or in fat distribution Δ(VF/SCF). CONCLUSION: LSG and LRYGB show better preferential and overall VF reduction than LAGB. US may serve as a simple tool of evaluating postoperative fat distribution.

Ileocolic versus small-bowel intussusception in children: can US enable reliable differentiation?

PURPOSE: To assess clinical and ultrasonographic (US) criteria that can be used to confidently differentiate ileocolic from small-bowel intussusception. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained for this retrospective study, and the need to obtain informed consent was waived. US and clinical data for children given a diagnosis of intussusception in the years 2007 through 2011 were evaluated. The diameters of the intussusception and the inner fat core, the outer bowel wall thickness, and the presence or absence of lymph nodes inside the intussusception and mesentery were noted. The Student t test, the Mann-Whitney test, and the Levene test were used for comparison of parametric variables, while the χ(2) and Fisher exact tests were used for comparison of categoric data. RESULTS: There were 200 cases of intussusception in 174 patients (126 boys, 48 girls; mean age, 17.2 months (range, 0 years to 7 years 1 month); 57 (28.5%) were small-bowel and 143 (71.5%) were ileocolic intussusceptions. Mean lesion diameter was 2.63 cm (range, 1.3-4.0 cm) for ileocolic versus 1.42 cm (range, 0.8-3.0 cm) for small-bowel intussusception (P < .0001). Mean fat core diameter was 1.32 cm (range, 0.6-2.2 cm) for ileocolic versus 0.1 cm (range, 0-0.75 cm) for small-bowel intussusception (P < .0001). The ratio of inner fat core diameter to outer wall thickness was greater than 1.0 in all ileocolic intussusceptions and was less than 1.0 in all small-bowel intussusceptions (P < .0001). Lymph nodes inside the lesion were seen in 128 (89.5%) of the 143 ileocolic intussusceptions versus in eight (14.0%) of the 57 small-bowel intussusceptions (P < .0001). Children with ileocolic intussusception had more severe clinical symptoms and signs, with more vomiting (P = .003), leukocytosis (P = .003), and blood in the stool (P = .00005). CONCLUSION: The presence of an inner fatty core in the intussusception, lesion diameter, wall thickness, the ratio of fatty core thickness to outer wall thickness, and the presence of lymph nodes in the lesion may enable reliable differentiation between ileocolic and small-bowel intussusceptions.