Transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus endoscopic mucosal resection for large rectal adenomas (TREND-study)

Background: Recent non-randomized studies suggest that extended endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is equally effective in removing large rectal adenomas as transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). If equally effective, EMR might be a more cost-effective approach as this strategy does not require expensive equipment, general anesthesia and hospital admission. Furthermore, EMR appears to be associated with fewer complications. The aim of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of TEM and EMR for the resection of large rectal adenomas. Methods/design. Multicenter randomized trial among 15 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients with a rectal adenoma 3 cm, located between 115 cm ab ano, will be randomized to a TEM- or EMR-treatment strategy. For TEM, patients will be treated under general anesthesia, adenomas will be dissected en-bloc by a full-thickness excision, and patients will be admitted to the hospital. For EMR, no or conscious sedation is used, lesions will be resected through the submucosal plane i

Oncological outcome of malignant colonic obstruction in the Dutch Stent-In 2 trial

Cellular mechanisms in basic and clinical gastroenterology and hepatolog

The symptom sensitivity index: a valuable additional parameter in 24-hour esophageal pH recording

Twenty-four-hour esophageal pH monitoring is useful for the quantitative measurement of gastroesophageal reflux and for the demonstration of a temporal relationship between symptoms and reflux. The symptom index, a numerical score, was developed to quantify the association between symptoms and reflux. Because the symptom index primarily assesses the specificity of a patient's reflux symptoms, we propose to refer to this score as the symptom specificity index. Because of certain limitations of this score, we developed and evaluated a new score, the symptom sensitivity index, that quantifies the subject's sensitivity for reflux. Fifty-two consecutive patients, referred to our laboratory for ambulatory 24-h pH recording were studied. Beside the conventional reflux variables, both indexes were calculated. Although a statistically significant correlation between the indexes was found, discordance between the specificity and sensitivity indexes was seen in 17 patients (33%). Based on the findings in this study we advocate that the symptom sensitivity index should be used, in addition to the symptom specificity index, and incorporated in future pH studies to optimalize the interpretation of the result

The value of 24-hour combined esophageal pressure and pH recording in the detection of esophageal function abnormalities

Gastroesophageal reflux and esophageal motor abnormalities are suspected of being the source of chest pain when a cardiac origin of the pain has been excluded. Because of the usually intermittent character of the motility disturbances, short conventional manometry, with or without provocation tests, often fails to establish the diagnosis. Therefore, 24-h esophageal pressure and pH recording was developed and has been proposed as a diagnostic tool in the study of patients who suffer from intermittent substernal pain. In this paper the value of 24-h combined esophageal pressure and pH recording in detecting disordered esophageal function in noncardiac chest pain and other esophageal disorders is discusse

Clinical application of 24-hour ambulatory esophageal pH and pressure monitoring

Recently, 24-h recording of intraesophageal pH and pressure signals in ambulatory subjects has become possible. Several research applications of the technique have emerged, but until now only a few clinical applications have been established, the most important of which is noncardiac chest pain. In the computer analysis of the signals, the patient with noncardiac chest pain is used as his or her own control; motility and pH profiles during pain are compared with asymptomatic base-line values obtained from the same patient. Automated analysis by means of a computer avoids observer bias and saves time. By means of 24-h monitoring, motor abnormalities have been identified as the cause of the chest pain in 4.5% to 18% and reflux in 4.5% to 25% of the patients studied. In addition, patients were identified who have both dysmotility- and reflux-related pain episodes. The yield of 24-h monitoring is highest in patients who have frequent pain episodes. A high yield of 24-h monitoring was found in patients with noncardiac chest pain admitted to a coronary care unit. Seventy-six per cent of these patients were found to have either reflux- of dysmotility-related chest pain. Patients with proven coronary artery disease who do not respond well to adequate treatment frequently have gastroesophageal reflux (39%) or esophageal motor abnormalities (50%) as the cause of their ongoing pain attacks. In these patients, identification of the esophageal cause of the symptoms not only helps the physician to select the optimal treatment but also reduces the patient's need for medical car

Esophageal motility in low-grade reflux esophagitis, evaluated by stationary and 24-hour ambulatory manometry

Whereas previous studies have unequivocally shown that esophageal motility is abnormal in patients with severe reflux esophagitis, the results of motility testing in patients with low-grade esophagitis are inconsistent. We studied 27 patients with Savary grade I and II esophagitis and 24 healthy controls matched for age and sex. Both underwent conventional manometry and 24-h ambulatory pH and pressure monitoring. Esophageal acid exposure was greater in patients than controls. The mean lower esophageal sphincter pressure was significantly lower in esophagitis patients [1.46 +/- 0.09 vs. 1.79 +/- 0.11 kPa (10.98 +/- 0.68 vs. 13.46 +/- 0.83 mm Hg)]. The total number of contractions recorded in the 24-h period was not different in the patient group (2168 +/- 108.4 vs. 2033 +/- 130.5), but esophagitis patients had an increased number of nontransmitted contractions (968 +/- 39.4 vs. 773 +/- 50.2, p < 0.01). A tendency toward a decreased prevalence of peristaltic contractions just failed to reach statistical significance (p = 0.07). Both conventional manometry and 24-h monitoring showed no significant difference in peristaltic amplitude between the two groups. Differences in contraction duration (2.02 +/- 0.08 vs. 2.39 +/- 0.12 s, p < 0.01) and velocity of the peristaltic wave (3.65 +/- 0.10 vs. 4.63 +/- 0.13 cm/s, p < 0.01) were only detected by 24-h monitoring. The findings made in this study do not support the concept that impaired esophageal peristalsis is a major factor in the pathogenesis of low-grade esophagiti

Ambulatory esophageal monitoring in noncardiac chest pain

The esophageal origin of angina-like noncardiac chest pain can be identified with certainty only when spontaneous chest pain episodes are associated with gastroesophageal reflux, abnormal esophageal motility, or both. Since noncardiac chest pain typically occurs infrequently, prolonged monitoring is required to establish such an association. Ambulatory esophageal monitoring offers the additional advantages of studying the patient in everyday life and avoiding hospital admission. Although the amplification and storage of 24-hour signals in a portable recorder no longer poses technical problems, the complexity of the analysis of the recorded signals should not be underestimated. For noncardiac chest pain, the most relevant part of the analysis is the association between chest pain episodes and the recorded esophageal signals. To determine whether contraction amplitude or duration during chest pain episodes is abnormal, their measurements are compared with baseline values from the same patient. Fully automated analysis by computer is feasible and, since it avoids observer bias, preferable. The yield of 24-hour monitoring in noncardiac chest pain reported by different groups of investigators varies considerably. Motor abnormalities have been identified as the cause of chest pain in 4.5-18% of patients studied, and reflux in 4.5-25%. In addition, some patients had both dysmotility- and reflux-related pain episodes. As expected, the yield of the technique is higher in patients with frequent pain episodes. In patients who do not experience pain during 24-hour monitoring, the technique cannot provide a firm diagnosis of pain of esophageal origin. Recently, a much higher yield of 24-hour monitoring was reported in patients with noncardiac chest pain admitted to a coronary-care unit. A total of 76% of these patients were found to have either reflux- or dysmotility-related chest pain. Despite its relatively low yield, the addition of esophageal pressure monitoring to ambulatory pH monitoring is worthwhile and probably also cost-effective in patients with frequent episodes of unexplained chest pai