14 research outputs found

    Transpancreatic biliary sphincterotomy versus double guidewire in difficult biliary cannulation : a randomized controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background Difficult biliary cannulation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) increases the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). The purpose of this prospective, randomized, multicenter study was to compare two advanced rescue methods, transpancreatic biliary sphincterotomy (TPBS) and a double-guidewire (DGW) technique, in difficult common bile duct (CBD) cannulation. Methods Patients with native papilla and planned CBD cannulation were recruited at eight Scandinavian hospitals. An experienced endoscopist attempted CBD cannulation with wire-guided cannulation. If the procedure fulfilled the definition of difficult cannulation and a guidewire entered the pancreatic duct, randomization to either TPBS or to DGW was performed. If the randomized method failed, any method available was performed. The primary end point was the frequency of PEP and the secondary end points included successful cannulation with the randomized method. Results In total, 1190 patients were recruited and 203 (17.1%) were randomized according to the study protocol (TPBS 104 and DGW 99). PEP developed in 14/104 patients (13.5%) in the TPBS group and 16/99 patients (16.2%) in the DGW group (P=0.69). No difference existed in PEP severity between the groups. The rate of successful deep biliary cannulation was significantly higher with TPBS (84.6% [88/104]) than with DGW (69.7% [69/99]; P=0.01). Conclusions In difficult biliary cannulation, there was no difference in PEP rate between TPBS and DGW techniques. TPBS is a good alternative in cases of difficult cannulation when the guidewire is in the pancreatic duct.Peer reviewe

    Quality of Endoscopic Surveillance of Barrett’s Esophagus in Denmark

    No full text
    <p><b>Objectives:</b> The aim of this study was to evaluate adherence to Barrett’s esophagus (BE) surveillance guidelines in Denmark.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> The Danish Pathology Registry was used to identify 3692 patients. A total of 300 patients were included by drawing a simple random sample. Description of the BE segment, biopsy protocol, communication with the pathologist and planned follow-up endoscopy, was evaluated.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> Thirty-one patients were excluded due to missing reports and 83 patients (28%) due to no endoscopic evidence of BE. Endoscopists suspected BE in 186 patients (62%) and these patients were included. Prague C&M classification was used in 34% of the endoscopy reports. The median number of biopsies was 4 (interquartile range (IQR), 3–6). The BE segment was stratified by lengths of 1–5, 6–10 and 11–15 cm and endoscopists obtained a sufficient number of biopsies in 12, 8 and 0% of cases, respectively. 28% of endoscopists described the exact location of the biopsy site in the pathology requisition. Patients with nondysplastic BE had endoscopic surveillance performed after a median of 24 months (IQR, 6–24).</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> Adherence to the Danish guidelines was poor. This may be associated with insufficient quality of BE surveillance. Lack of endoscopic evidence of BE in the Danish Pathology Registry may have underestimated the incidence of adenocarcinoma in BE patients in previous studies.</p

    Protection against infections with Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae type B in a population of splenectomized individuals with varying vaccination status

    No full text
    More than 100 persons from Dallas contributed to the Mexican state of Colima to be entered in the next Guinness book of world records for having created the world's largest lemonade at 3500 liters. 20,000 lemons, or one ton, from the valleys of Colima along with 3750 liters of water and 56 liters of syrup beat out the previous record holder of 2500 liters that was created in Victoria, Australia in 1996

    Esophageal Acid Clearance Is Faster in Patients with Barrett's Esophagus Than in Healthy Controls During Random Swallowing

    No full text
    BACKGROUND/AIMS: Impaired esophageal acid clearance may be a contributing factor in the pathogenesis of Barrett’s esophagus. However, few studies have measured acid clearance as such in these patients. In this explorative, cross-sectional study, we aimed to compare esophageal acid clearance and swallowing rate in patients with Barrett’s esophagus to that in healthy controls. METHODS: A total of 26 patients with histology-confirmed Barrett’s esophagus and 12 healthy controls underwent (1) upper endoscopy, (2) an acid clearance test using a pH-impedance probe under controlled conditions including controlled and random swallowing, and (3) an ambulatory pH-impedance measurement. RESULTS: Compared with controls and when swallowing randomly, patients cleared acid 46% faster (P = 0.008). Furthermore, patients swallowed 60% more frequently (mean swallows/minute: 1.90 ± 0.74 vs 1.19 ± 0.58; P = 0.005), and acid clearance time decreased with greater random swallowing rate (P < 0.001). Swallowing rate increased with lower distal esophageal baseline impedance (P = 0.014). Ambulatory acid exposure was greater in patients (P = 0.033), but clearance times assessed from the ambulatory pH-measurement and acid clearance test were not correlated (all P > 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: More frequent swallowing and thus faster acid clearance in Barrett’s esophagus may constitute a protective reflex due to impaired mucosal integrity and possibly acid hypersensitivity. Despite these reinforced mechanisms, acid clearance ability seems to be overthrown by repeated, retrograde acid reflux, thus resulting in increased esophageal acid exposure and consequently mucosal changes

    Quality of endoscopic surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus

    No full text
    <p><b>Objectives:</b> The aim of this study was to evaluate adherence to Barrett’s esophagus (BE) surveillance guidelines in Denmark.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> The Danish Pathology Registry was used to identify 3692 patients. A total of 300 patients were included by drawing a simple random sample. Description of the BE segment, biopsy protocol, communication with the pathologist and planned follow-up endoscopy, was evaluated.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> Thirty-one patients were excluded due to missing reports and 83 patients (28%) due to no endoscopic evidence of BE. Endoscopists suspected BE in 186 patients (62%) and these patients were included. Prague C&M classification was used in 34% of the endoscopy reports. The median number of biopsies was 4 (interquartile range (IQR), 3–6). The BE segment was stratified by lengths of 1–5, 6–10 and 11–15 cm and endoscopists obtained a sufficient number of biopsies in 12, 8 and 0% of cases, respectively. 28% of endoscopists described the exact location of the biopsy site in the pathology requisition. Patients with nondysplastic BE had endoscopic surveillance performed after a median of 24 months (IQR, 6–24).</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> Adherence to the Danish guidelines was poor. This may be associated with insufficient quality of BE surveillance. Lack of endoscopic evidence of BE in the Danish Pathology Registry may have underestimated the incidence of adenocarcinoma in BE patients in previous studies.</p
    corecore