Idiopathic acute pancreatitis-A myth or reality? Role of endoscopic ultrasonography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in its diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Around 10% to 30% patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) do not have a cause after the routine investigations, and are considered as having idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). Establishing the etiology in such patients will prevent recurrences and evolution to chronic pancreatitis. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) characteristically are used to diagnose IAP when routine methods fail, but their exact role is not determined. METHODS: This prospective study was undertaken in a tertiary care hospital, in which patients admitted initially with diagnosis of IAP were evaluated. These patients underwent MRCP and EUS at least 4 weeks after an attack of AP. The results of EUS and MRCP were compared and analyzed with various clinical variables using suitable statistical tests. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients with IAP were included. EUS and/or MRCP was able to establish at least one etiology in 17 patients (54.8%). The diagnoses revealed were gallbladder (GB) microlithiasis, GB sludge, choledocholithiasis, pancreatobiliary ductal anomalies, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of both the modalities, EUS (14/31) was able to diagnose more cases than MRCP (8/31). The diagnostic capability of EUS was lower in patients who had a cholecystectomy (12.5% vs. 56.5%; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: EUS and MRCP are useful modalities in the etiological diagnosis of IAP and should be used in conjunction. EUS is better for establishing a possible biliary etiology and MRCP for an anatomical alteration in pancreatobiliary ducts.

Clinical profile of patients presenting with dysphagia - an experience from a tertiary care center in North India.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Dysphagia can lead to substantial morbidity and mortality, especially in the elderly. It has both benign and malignant causes. Despite having a varied etiology, there have been few studies in India. Therefore, a study was undertaken to evaluate the clinical profile and various etiologies of dysphagia. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on 220 patients with a complaint of dysphagia. Detailed history and examination, endoscopy and biopsies, and barium swallow were performed. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging were performed wherever required. Patients who had an oropharyngeal or neurological cause of dysphagia were excluded. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 57.2 years, with the male: female ratio being 1.7:1. Of the patients, 35% (78 patients) had malignant etiology, with a mean age of 65.2 years, and 65% (142 patients) had a benign etiology, with a mean age of 51 years. Among the patients with malignancy, 56 had squamous cell carcinoma of esophagus (71.7%), 20 had adenocarcinoma of esophagus (25.7%), and 2 had gastric cardia adenocarcinoma (2.6%). Malignancy was most commonly located in distal esophagus (48 patients), and among the cases, 18 had involvement of the gastroesophageal junction. The most common benign cause was esophagitis secondary to reflux in 25.5% (56 patients), followed by esophageal ulcer in 5.9%, achalasia in 5%, corrosive stricture in 4.5%, and peptic stricture in 3.6%. CONCLUSION: Dysphagia has diverse etiology, and a majority can be diagnosed by endoscopy and barium swallow. Malignancy is an important cause of dysphagia in elderly. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma remains the most common malignancy, but the incidence of gastroesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma is increasing.