Metastatic Uveal Malignant Melanoma: A Case Report

Case Report A 77-year-old woman presented with a chief complaint of one day history of severe, acute abdominal pain. The patient described the pain as intense, non-radiating, and located primarily in the left upper abdominal quadrant.The pain was associated with nausea and multiple episodes of non-bilious, non-bloody emesis. She denied melena and hematochezia. On physical examination, her abdomen was soft and exquisitely tender in the left upper quadrant and epigastric regions. Aside from trace lower extremity edema.the remainder of her physical examination was unremarkable. Laboratory results at the time of admission were notable for:hemoglobin 10.8 g/dL, alkaline phosphatase 459 U/L, aspartate transaminase 56 U/L, and alanine transaminase 66 U/L. The patient\u27s past medical history was significant for hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, papillary thyroid carcinoma. and right eye uveal melanoma. The ocular melanoma was treated 16 years ago with radioactive plaque followed by transpupillary thermal therapy. The patient was diagnosed with metastatic disease to her liver approximately 6 years prior and she had received several rounds of hepatic radiation and chemotherapeutic embolizations. The patient\u27s oncologist closely monitored her for disease progression through regular abdominal imaging studies

Efficacy of morning-only compared with split-dose polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution for afternoon colonoscopy: a randomized controlled single-blind study.

OBJECTIVES: Administering a purgative close to the time of colonoscopy is optimal for cleansing. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of morning-only (AM-only) polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution (PEG-ELS) to split-dose (PM/AM) PEG-ELS for afternoon colonoscopy. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, investigator-blinded, non-inferiority study comparing AM-only to PM/AM PEG-ELS for afternoon outpatient colonoscopy. The primary end point was whole colon prep adequacy. Tolerance and polyp detection were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 125 patients were randomized and 9 withdrew without taking any prep. Of 116 analyzed, 62 received AM-only prep and 54 received PM/AM prep. The whole colon prep was adequate in 92% in the AM-only group vs. 94% in the PM/AM group (95% lower confidence limit, LCL, for the difference=-11.3%, non-inferiority P=0.013), whereas the right colon prep was adequate in 93 and 92%, respectively (95% LCL=-7.8%, non-inferiority P=0.003). Polyp detection was greater, and not inferior, in the AM-only group (mean=1.57 vs. 0.94 polyps/patient, non-inferiority P=0.007). The overall incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the two groups (P=0.273), but the AM-only group had lower incidence of abdominal pain (P=0.024). The AM-only group also had better sleep quality (P=0.007) and less interference with the previous workday (P=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: AM-only and PM/AM PEG-ELS are clinically equivalent with respect to cleansing efficacy and polyp detection. AM-only prep was associated with a lower incidence of abdominal pain, superior sleep quality, and less interference with workday before colonoscopy

Efficacy of morning-only compared with split-dose polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution for afternoon colonoscopy: a randomized controlled single-blind study.

OBJECTIVES: Administering a purgative close to the time of colonoscopy is optimal for cleansing. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of morning-only (AM-only) polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution (PEG-ELS) to split-dose (PM/AM) PEG-ELS for afternoon colonoscopy. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, investigator-blinded, non-inferiority study comparing AM-only to PM/AM PEG-ELS for afternoon outpatient colonoscopy. The primary end point was whole colon prep adequacy. Tolerance and polyp detection were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 125 patients were randomized and 9 withdrew without taking any prep. Of 116 analyzed, 62 received AM-only prep and 54 received PM/AM prep. The whole colon prep was adequate in 92% in the AM-only group vs. 94% in the PM/AM group (95% lower confidence limit, LCL, for the difference=-11.3%, non-inferiority P=0.013), whereas the right colon prep was adequate in 93 and 92%, respectively (95% LCL=-7.8%, non-inferiority P=0.003). Polyp detection was greater, and not inferior, in the AM-only group (mean=1.57 vs. 0.94 polyps/patient, non-inferiority P=0.007). The overall incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the two groups (P=0.273), but the AM-only group had lower incidence of abdominal pain (P=0.024). The AM-only group also had better sleep quality (P=0.007) and less interference with the previous workday (P=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: AM-only and PM/AM PEG-ELS are clinically equivalent with respect to cleansing efficacy and polyp detection. AM-only prep was associated with a lower incidence of abdominal pain, superior sleep quality, and less interference with workday before colonoscopy

Spiral Enteroscopy Utilizing Capsule Location Index for Achieving High Diagnostic and Therapeutic Yield.

Background and Aim. Spiral enteroscopy (SE) is a new small bowel endoscopic technique. Our aim is to review the diagnostic and therapeutic yield, safety of SE, and the predictive role of prior capsule endoscopy (CE) at an academic center. Methods. A retrospective review of patients undergoing SE after prior CE between 2008 and 2013 was performed. Capsule location index (CLI) was defined as the fraction of total small bowel transit time when the lesion was seen on CE. Results. A total of 174 SEs were performed: antegrade (147) and retrograde (27). Abnormalities on SE were detected in 65% patients. The procedure was safe in patients with surgically altered bowel anatomy (n = 12). The diagnostic yield of antegrade SE decreased with increasing CLI range. The diagnostic yield of retrograde SE decreased on decreasing CLI range. A CLI cutoff of 0.6 was derived that determined the initial route of SE. Vascular ectasias seen on CE were detected in 83% cases on SE; p \u3c 0.01. Conclusions. SE is safe with a high diagnostic and therapeutic yield. CLI is predictive of the success of SE and determines the best route of SE. The type of small bowel pathology targeted by SE may affect its utility and yield