Laparoscopic treatment for unsuspected common bile duct stones by transcystic sphincter of Oddi pneumatic balloon dilation and pressure-washing technique.

BACKGROUND: Unsuspected common bile duct stones (CBDS) are found in 4-5 % of patients with cholelithiasis. The optimal strategy for the treatment of asymptomatic CBDS, diagnosed during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), is not yet well established. A one-stage solution is preferable to solve the CBDS during the LC and to avoid the exposure of patients to the risks of a second procedure, such as complications or failure. METHODS: We attempted to remove CBDS by transcystic sphincter of Oddi pneumatic balloon dilation and common bile duct pressure-washing in all cases of intraoperative identification of CBDS since September 2008. RESULTS: In 29 cases, unsuspected CBDS was identified by intraoperative cholangiography; in 28 cases a single stone with a mean diameter of 4.3 mm (range = 3-6) was detected and in one case three 5-8-mm-diameter stones were identified. Clearance of the common bile duct was obtained in 27 cases (96 %), with a mean operative time of 54 min (range = 36-90) and mean length of hospital stay of 2.5 days. CONCLUSION: Treatment of unsuspected CBDS detected by intraoperative cholangiography during LC with this original technique was safe and effective and a viable alternative of the transcystic endoscopic approach.

Upper GI endoscopy in elderly patients: predictive factors of relevant endoscopic findings.

Elderly patients are at increased risk for peptic ulcer and cancer. Predictive factors of relevant endoscopic findings at upper endoscopy in the elderly are unknown. This was a post hoc analysis of a nationwide, endoscopic study. A total of 3,147 elderly patients were selected. Demographic, clinical, and endoscopic data were systematically collected. Relevant findings and new diagnoses of peptic ulcer and malignancy were computed. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. A total of 1,559 (49.5%), 213 (6.8%), 93 (3%) relevant findings, peptic ulcers, and malignancies were detected. Peptic ulcers and malignancies were more frequent in >85-year-old patients (OR 3.1, 95% CI = 2.0-4.7, p = 0.001). The presence of dysphagia (OR = 5.15), weight loss (OR = 4.77), persistent vomiting (OR = 3.68), anaemia (OR = 1.83), and male gender (OR = 1.9) were significantly associated with a malignancy, whilst overt bleeding (OR = 6.66), NSAIDs use (OR = 2.23), and epigastric pain (OR = 1.90) were associated with the presence of peptic ulcer. Peptic ulcer or malignancies were detected in 10% of elderly patients, supporting the use of endoscopy in this age group. Very elderly patients appear to be at higher risk of such lesions.

Ileal intubation with a transnasal endoscope.

Transnasal upper endoscopy has been implemented in the last decade as it is perceived as less fastidious than peroral endoscopy, and small-caliber gastroscopes are widely available in the endoscopic centres. We report the feasibility of performing a full colonic study with ileal intubation, using a small-caliber endoscope commonly used for transanal endoscopy, after failing with a standard gastroscope.

Appropriateness guidelines and predictive rules to select patients for upper endoscopy: a nationwide multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: Selecting patients appropriately for upper endoscopy (EGD) is crucial for efficient use of endoscopy. The objective of this study was to compare different clinical strategies and statistical methods to select patients for EGD, namely appropriateness guidelines, age and/or alarm features, and multivariate and artificial neural network (ANN) models. METHODS: A nationwide, multicenter, prospective study was undertaken in which consecutive patients referred for EGD during a 1-month period were enrolled. Before EGD, the endoscopist assessed referral appropriateness according to the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines, also collecting clinical and demographic variables. Outcomes of the study were detection of relevant findings and new diagnosis of malignancy at EGD. The accuracy of the following clinical strategies and predictive rules was compared: (i) ASGE appropriateness guidelines (indicated vs. not indicated), (ii) simplified rule (>or=45 years or alarm features vs. <45 years without alarm features), (iii) logistic regression model, and (iv) ANN models. RESULTS: A total of 8,252 patients were enrolled in 57 centers. Overall, 3,803 (46%) relevant findings and 132 (1.6%) new malignancies were detected. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the simplified rule were similar to that of the ASGE guidelines for both relevant findings (82%/26%/0.55 vs. 88%/27%/0.52) and cancer (97%/22%/0.58 vs. 98%/20%/0.58). Both logistic regression and ANN models seemed to be substantially more accurate in predicting new cases of malignancy, with an AUC of 0.82 and 0.87, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A simple predictive rule based on age and alarm features is similarly effective to the more complex ASGE guidelines in selecting patients for EGD. Regression and ANN models may be useful in identifying a relatively small subgroup of patients at higher risk of cancer.

Appropriateness of upper-GI endoscopy: an Italian survey on behalf of the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Open-access endoscopy allows physicians to directly schedule endoscopic procedures for their patients without prior consultation. An evaluation of both appropriateness and diagnostic yield of endoscopic procedures is critical when assessing the costs and benefits of endoscopy in an open-access setting. The aim of this Italian multicenter study was to assess the appropriate use of upper endoscopy (EGD) in an open-access system and to establish the yield of diagnostic information relevant to patient care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional, prospective, multicenter study. PATIENTS: A total of 6270 patients referred to 44 Italian centers for open-access EGD during 1 month were prospectively enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines were used to assess the relation between the appropriate use of EGD and the presence of relevant endoscopic findings. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The rate for "generally not indicated" EGDs was 22.9%: 29.4% for primary care physicians and 12.9% for specialists (P < .01). A relevant endoscopic finding was detected in 2929 examinations (46.7%). The diagnostic yield was significantly higher for "generally indicated" EGDs compared with "generally not indicated" procedures (52% vs 29%; odds ratio [OR] 2.65, 99% confidence interval [CI] 2.23-3.20; P < .01). Of the 133 malignant lesions diagnosed, all but 1 were diagnosed in patients with an appropriate indication (OR >20, 99% CI 3 to >100; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Open-access EGD is an useful procedure for clinical practice. Because most of the relevant findings were detected during examinations performed for appropriate indications, the use of ASGE guidelines emerges as crucial to the cost-effectiveness of an open-access system.