Portal Vein Thrombosis in non cirrhotic patients

Extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis (EPVT) is the most common cause of portal hypertension in non- cirrhotic patients. EPVT has been defined as an obstruction of the extrahepatic portal vein with or without involvement of the intrahepatic portal veins. Although the portal vein accounts for two third of the total hepatic blood flow, interruption of the portal vein has few clinical consequences. This could be explained by two findings. First a compensatory mechanism so called arterial ’buffer’ response, which consists of immediate vasodilatation of the hepatic arterial bed in response to a decreased portal vein blood flow. This mechanism has been well demonstrated experimentally, but also in patients following portal vein clamping at hepatic surgery. The second compensatory mechanism is a rapid development of collateral veins bypassing the thrombosed portion of the portal vein. As a result of the arterial buffer response and development of collaterals, total hepatic blood flow is minimally reduced. Portal pressure, however is increased. This increase in portal pressure can be viewed as a compensatory mechanism allowing portal vein perfusion to be maintained through the collateral veins. So, portal perfusion is maintained at the expense of portal hypertension. The etiology of EPVT is diverse and can be divided into local risk factors such as cirrhosis, hepatobiliary malignancies and pancreatitis, and systemic risk factors such as inherited and acquired prothrombotic disorders. In at least one third of the patients a combination of thrombotic risk factors is demonstrated

Natural History of Barrett’s Esophagus

Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a very common condition. We have obtained fairly profound knowledge of the natural history of this condition. This results from many cross-sectional and cohort studies, many describing patients undergoing long-term surveillance. Their consent to use their clinical data has improved our knowledge to the benefit of these same and other patients. The prevalence of BE increases with age both in men and in women. This increase starts at a younger age in men than in women. The incidence of high-grade dysplasia and cancer in BE depends on segment length, gender, and age. The latter two likely indicate the duration of the presence of BE in an individual patient. Other factors that influence the incidence of dysplasia and cancer are smoking behavior and use of certain medications such as PPIs, statins, and NSAIDs. Surveillance of BE and treatment of dysplasia can impact the incidence of and mortality due to esophageal adenocarcinoma. This is of major benefit to a subgroup of BE patients. The epidemiology and burden of disease ask for further efforts to develop targeted screening, surveillance, and intervention techniques in coming years

Advances in Fecal Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening

textabstractColorectal cancer (CRC) forms an important public health problem, especially in developed countries. CRC screening tests can be used to identify asymptomatic individuals with CRC precursors and (early) cancer. Removal of these lesions reduces CRC incidence and prevents CRC-related mortality. There are a range of screening tests available, each with advantages and disadvantages. Stool screening tests can broadly be divided into fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) and molecular biomarker test, such as DNA/RNA marker tests, protein markers, and fecal microbiome marker tests. Guaiac fecal occult blood tests (gFOBT) have been demonstrated in large randomized screening trials to reduce CRC mortality. Fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) have superior adherence, usability, and accuracy as compared to gFOBT. Advantage of the use of quantitative FITs in CRC screening programs is the cut-off level that can be adjusted. Molecular biomarker DNA tests have shown to detect significantly more cancers than FIT. By combining biomarker DNA tests with FIT, sensitivity for advanced adenomas can be increased significantly. However, it has lower specificity thus demands more colonoscopy resources, is more cumbersome, and costly. The adherence has not been assessed in population screening trials. For these reasons, FIT is therefore at present regarded as the preferred method of non-invasive CRC screening. This chapter will review the current status of fecal test-based CRC screening

Predictors of Gastrointestinal Transit Times in Colon Capsule Endoscopy

Optimizing the accuracy of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) requires high completion rates. To prevent incomplete CCE, we aimed to identify predictors associated with slow CCE transit times. METHODS: In this population-based study, participants received CCE with a split-dose polyethylene glycol bowel preparation and booster regimen (0.5 L oral sulfate solution and 10 mg metoclopramide if capsule remained in stomach for > 1 hour). The following predictors were assessed: age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking, coffee and fiber intake, diet quality, physical activity, dyspeptic complaints, stool pattern, history of abdominal surgery, medication use, and CCE findings. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions with backward elimination were performed. RESULTS: We analyzed 451 CCE procedures with a completion rate of 51.9%. The completion rate was higher among older participants (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04–2.28, P = 0.03) and participants with a changed stool pattern (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.20–4.30, P = 0.01). Participants with a history of abdominal surgery had a lower completion rate (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36–0.80, P = 0.003). Participants with higher BMI had faster stomach, small bowel, and total transit times (β = −0.10, P = 0.01; β = −0.14, P = 0.001; β = −0.12, P = 0.01). A faster small bowel transit was found in participants with a changed stool pattern (β = −0.08, P = 0.049) and the use of metoclopramide (β = −0.14, P = 0.001). Participants with high fiber intake had a slower colonic transit (β = 0.11, P = 0.03). DISCUSSION: Younger age, unchanged stool pattern, history of abdominal surgery, low BMI, and high fiber intake resulted in slower CCE transit times and lower completion rates. In future practice, these factors can be considered to adjust preparation protocols

NSAIDs, statins, low-dose aspirin and PPIs, and the risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma among patients with Barrett's oesophagus: A populationbased case-control study

Objectives: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), low-dose aspirin and statins may decrease the risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) among patients with Barrett's oesophagus (BO). However, previous studies did not adequately address bias and confounding. Our objective was to estimate the risk of OAC among patients with BO exposed to NSAIDs, statins and PPIs. Design: Case-control study nested within a BO cohort. Setting: Two primary care databases (the UK and the Netherlands (NL)). Participants: Cases were adults ≥18 years of age with OAC or high-grade dysplasia (HGD) diagnosis ≥1 year after BO diagnosis. Controls were matched on age, sex, year of BO diagnosis and database. Exposure: Drug use was assessed from BO diagnosis until matching date. Outcome measure: Adjusted ORs with 95% CI were calculated by conditional logistic regression. Results: Within the BO cohort (n=15 134), 45 OAC (UK: 40, NL: 5) and 12 HGD cases (NL: 12) were identified. ORa for OAC during NSAID use was 1.2 (95% CI 0.6 to 2.5) and during statin use for <3 years 0.5 (95% CI 0.1 to 1.7). When including HGD cases (n=57), ORa for NSAID use was 0.9 (95% CI 0.5 to 1.8) and for statin use <3 years 0.5 (95% CI 0.1 to 1.7). Higher doses of statins showed lower estimates for OAC and HGD, though not statistically significant. Low-dose aspirin and PPIs did not significantly decrease the risk of OAC and HGD. Conclusions: In this population-based nested case- control study, use of NSAIDs, PPIs, low-dose aspirin or statins did not reduce the risk of HGD and OAC among patients with BO. These findings indicate that for an unselected group of patients with BO chemoprevention by use of drugs to reduce progression to HGD and OAC should not be directly considered as routine care