Different tissue reaction of oesophagus and diaphragm after mesh hiatoplasty. Results of an animal study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Laparoscopic mesh-reinforcement of the hiatal region in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and paraesophageal hernia (PEH) reduces the risk of recurrence. However, there are still controversies about the technique of mesh placement, shape, structure and material. We therefore compared tissue integration and scar formation after implantation of two different polypropylene-meshes in a rabbit model.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A total of 20 female chinchilla rabbits were included in this study. Two different meshes (Polypropylene PP, Polyglecaprone 25 Composite PP-PG) were implanted on the abdominal diaphragm around the oesophagus. After 3 months the implanted meshes were excised en-bloc. Histological and morphological analyses were carried out accordingly proliferation rate, apoptosis and collagen type I/III ratio.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Regarding proliferation rate of oesophagus PP (9.31 ± 3.4%) and PP-PG (13.26 ± 2.54%) differ in a significant (p = 0.0097) way. In the diaphragm we found a significant (p = 0.00066) difference between PP (9.43 ± 1.45%) and PP-PG (18.73 ± 5.92%) respectively. Comparing oesophagus and diaphragm we could prove a significant difference within PP-PG-group (p = 0.0195). Within PP-group the difference reached no statistical significance (p = 0.88). We found analogous results regarding apoptosis.</p> <p>Furthermore, there is a significant (p = 0.00013) difference of collagen type I/III ratio in PP-PG (12.28 ± 0.8) compared to PP (8.44 ± 1,63) in case of oesophageal tissue. Concerning diaphragm we found a significant difference (p = 0.000099) between PP-PG (8.85 ± 0.81) and PP (6.32 ± 1.07) as well.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The histologic and morphologic characteristics after prosthetic enforcement of the hiatus in this animal model show a more distinct tissue integration using PP-PG compared to PP. Additionally, different wound healing and remodelling capability influence tissue integration of the mesh in diaphragm and oesophagus.</p

Application of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) to evaluate the whole gastrointestinal tract: a comparative study of single-camera and dual-camera analysis

Jos&eacute; Mar&iacute;a Remes-Troche,1 Victoria Alejandra Jim&eacute;nez-Garc&iacute;a,2 Josefa Mar&iacute;a Garc&iacute;a-Montes,2 Pedro Hergueta-Delgado,2 Federico Roesch-Dietlen,1 Juan Manuel Herrer&iacute;as-Guti&eacute;rrez2 1Digestive Physiology and Motility Lab, Medical Biological Research Institute, Universidad Veracruzana, Veracruz, M&eacute;xico; 2Gastroenterology Service, Virgen Macarena University Hospital, Seville, Spain Background and study aims: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) was developed for the evaluation of colorectal pathology. In this study, our aim was to assess if a dual-camera analysis using CCE allows better evaluation of the whole gastrointestinal (GI) tract compared to a single-camera analysis. Patients and methods: We included 21 patients (12 males, mean age 56.20 years) submitted for a CCE examination. After standard colon preparation, the colon capsule endoscope (PillCam Colon&trade;) was swallowed after reinitiation from its &ldquo;sleep&rdquo; mode. Four physicians performed the analysis: two reviewed both video streams at the same time (dual-camera analysis); one analyzed images from one side of the device (&ldquo;camera 1&rdquo;); and the other reviewed the opposite side (&ldquo;camera 2&rdquo;). We compared numbers of findings from different parts of the entire GI tract and level of agreement among reviewers. Results: A complete evaluation of the GI tract was possible in all patients. Dual-camera analysis provided 16% and 5% more findings compared to camera 1 and camera 2 analysis, respectively. Overall agreement was 62.7% (kappa = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.373&ndash;0.510). Esophageal (kappa = 0.611) and colorectal (kappa = 0.595) findings had a good level of agreement, while small bowel (kappa = 0.405) showed moderate agreement. Conclusion: The use of dual-camera analysis with CCE for the evaluation of the GI tract is feasible and detects more abnormalities when compared with single-camera analysis. Keywords: capsule endoscopy, colon, gastrointestinal tract, small bowe