CHROMOENDOSCOPY USING TOLUIDINE BLUE PLUS LUGOL’S SOLUTION FOR EARLY DIAGNOSIS OF ESOPHAGEAL PREMALIGNANT LESIONS AND SUPERFICIAL NEOPLASMS IN HIGH-RISK PATIENTS

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer. The prognosis is bleak in patients with advanced stages. Patients with early disease have a better prognosis than those with advanced stage. There are several techniques for the screening of premalignant and superficial lesions including chromoendoscopy. OBJECTIVE: This article aimed to determine the effectiveness of chromoendoscopy with toluidine blue combined with Lugol’s solution for diagnosis of esophageal premalignant and superficial neoplastic lesions in high risk patients. METHODS: Routine white light upper endoscopy was performed. Toluidine blue was sprayed from the gastroesophageal junction to 20 cm of the dental arch. Then the uptake dye areas were characterized. Later Lugol’s solution was sprayed. Areas with less-intense staining were characterized. Biopsy of the toluidine blue capturing areas and areas with less-intense staining of Lugol’s solution were taken. In the cases where lesions were not evidenced after application of dyes, biopsies four quadrants of the esophageal mucosa were taken. The samples were evaluated by a digestive pathologist. RESULTS: Barrett’s esophagus was the most common premalignant lesion and the early neoplastic lesion was adenocarcinoma with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity 85.7%, positive predictive value 30%, negative predictive value 100%, positive likelihood ratio 7 negative likelihood ratio 0. CONCLUSION: Chromoendoscopy with toluidine blue combined with Lugol’s solution is a useful tool in the screening of esophageal premalignant lesions and superficial neoplasms

BEHIND THE PROTON PUMP INHIBITOR PRESCRIPTION: AN INTERNATIONAL SURVEY ON PHYSICIAN PRACTICES AND KNOWLEDGE

ABSTRACT Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed worldwide, often resulting in their overuse. Consequently, it is essential to identify the likely causes of this overuse to facilitate their appropriate prescription. Objective: This study aims to assess physician prescribing patterns, their knowledge of PPIs, and factors affecting their knowledge. Methods: An online survey was conducted among Latin American and Spanish physicians, collecting the following data: professional information, patterns of PPI usage, familiarity with published evidence, and the management approach in three hypothetical case-scenarios. Participant knowledge was categorized as sufficient or insufficient based on the results of the case scenarios. Subsequently, subgroup analysis was performed based on physician training level, years in practice, specialty, and time since the last PPI literature review. Results: A total of 371 physicians participated in the survey. Thirty-eight percent frequently prescribe PPIs, primarily for prophylactic purposes (57.9%). Eighty percent were unfamiliar with PPI deprescribing strategies, and 54.4% rarely reviewed the ongoing indication of patients taking a PPI. Sixty-four percent demonstrated sufficient knowledge in the case-scenarios. A significant association was observed between specialty type (medical vs surgical: 69.4% vs 46.8%, P5 years: 71.4% vs 58.7%, P=0.010), and sufficient knowledge. Conclusion: While most participants prescribed PPIs regularly and for prophylaxis purposes, the majority were unfamiliar with deprescribing strategies and rarely reviewed ongoing indications. Sufficient knowledge is correlated with recent literature reviews and medical specialty affiliation