Long-Term Outcome of Self Expandable Metal Stents for Biliary Obstruction in Chronic Pancreatitis

Context Insertion of a self-expandable metal stent is still controversial for treatment of benign common bile duct stenosis but can be a valuable alternative to surgical treatment. Objective Aim of our study was to analyze the efficacy of covered and uncovered self-expandable metal stent in patients with chronic pancreatitis and common bile duct stenosis. Material and methods Twenty patients with common bile duct stenosis due to alcoholic chronic pancreatitis were retrospective analyzed. All patients had advanced chronic pancreatitis, presenting with calcifications in pancreatic head. Uncovered self-expandable metal stent (uSEMS) were used in 11 patients (3 females, 8 males) while in 9 patients (3 females, 6 males) partially covered self-expandable metal stent (cSEMS) were inserted. All patients treated with self-expandable metal stent had contraindications for surgery. Results Overall mean follow up time was 155 weeks: 206 (52-412) weeks in uSEMS, and 93 (25-233) weeks in cSEMS, respectively. Stent patency was in mean 118 weeks: 159 (44-412) weeks in uSEMS and 67 (25-150) weeks in cSEMS (P=0.019). In the uSEMS group, reintervention was necessary in 5 patients (45%) due to stent obstruction, whereas in the cSEMS group 4 patients (44%) needed reintervention (2 obstructions, 2 migration). Stent migration is an early complication, compared to obstruction (P<0.05), and in cSEMS obstruction occurred significantly earlier compared to uSEMS (P<0.05). Conclusion Patency of uSEMS was significantly longer compared to partially cSEMS. Available self-expandable metal stent, unfortunately, do not meet the demands on successful treatment of benign common bile duct stenosis.Image: Kaplan-Meier-plot of estimated stent patency

Dibenzazecine compounds with a novel dopamine/5HT(2A )receptor profile and 3D-QSAR analysis

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotics are divided into typical and atypical compounds based on clinical efficacy and side effects. The purpose of this study was to characterize in vitro a series of novel azecine-type compounds at human dopamine D(1)-D(5 )and 5HT(2A )receptors and to assign them to different classes according to their dopamine/5HT(2A )receptor profile. RESULTS: Regardless of using affinity data (pK(i )values at D(1)-D(5 )and 5HT(2A)) or selectivity data (15 log (K(i )ratios)), principal component analysis with azecine-type compounds, haloperidol, and clozapine revealed three groups of dopamine/5HT(2A )ligands: 1) haloperidol; 2) clozapine plus four azecine-type compounds; 3) two hydroxylated dibenzazecines. Reducing the number of K(i )ratios used for principal component analysis from 15 to two (the D(1)/D(2 )and D(2)/5HT(2A )K(i )ratios) obtained the same three groups of compounds. The most potent dibenzazecine clustering in the same group as clozapine was the non-hydroxylated LE410 which shows a slightly different D(2)-like receptor profile (D(2L )> D(3 )> D(4.4)) than clozapine (D(4.4 )> D(2L )> D(3)). The monohydroxylated dibenzacezine LE404 clusters in a separate group from clozapine/LE410 and from haloperidol and shows increased D(1 )selectivity. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, two compounds with a novel dopamine/5HT(2A )receptor profile, LE404 and LE410, with some differences in their respective D(1)/D(2 )receptor affinities including a validated pharmacophore-based 3D-QSAR model for D(1 )antagonists are presented

Influence of laboratory-related and endoscopy-related factors on the assessment of serum pepsinogens and gastrin-17

Background and aim Serum pepsinogen I (PGI) and pepsinogen II (PGII) are noninvasive parameters in the detection of atrophic gastritis. The diagnostic add-on value of serum gastrin-17 (G-17) remains uncertain. The aim of this study was to assess the stability of these serum parameters over time and to evaluate the influence of clinical factors, such as upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy and bowel cleansing, on serum PGI, PGII, and G-17 assessment. Patients and methods A prospective study was carried out in healthy individuals and patients. For the stability analyses, the plasma and serum samples from 23 individuals were processed at different time points with and without the addition of a stabilizer. Ten patients were included to evaluate the influence of upper GI endoscopy and 18 patients to evaluate the effect of bowel cleansing before colonoscopy. Results PGI, PGII, and G-17 levels were not statistically different in the serum and plasma. PGI and PGII serum levels were stable over time. G-17 is associated with time-dependent degradation (P = 0.0001). The addition of the G-17 stabilizer showed no improvement in stability. Upper GI endoscopy and bowel preparation before colonoscopy were associated with minimal variations in PGI and PGII, whereas G-17 showed patient-specific alterations. Conclusion PGI and PGII serum levels are stable over time. However, G-17 stability is strongly dependent on the time of processing and storage;therefore, samples for G-17 analysis need to be processed no later than 6 h after blood collection. Upper GI endoscopy and colonoscopy preparation lead to minimal nonsignificant changes in basal PGI, PGII, and G-17 levels

Percutaneous transhepatic or endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage in malignant distal bile duct obstruction using a self-expanding metal stent: Study protocol for a prospective European multicenter trial (PUMa trial)

Background Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) was associated with better clinical success and a lower rate of adverse events (AEs) than fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in recent single center studies with mainly retrospective design and small case numbers (< 50). The aim of this prospective European multicenter study is to compare both drainage procedures using ultrasound-guidance and primary metal stent implantation in patients with malignant distal bile duct obstruction (PUMa Trial). Methods The study is designed as a non-randomized, controlled, parallel group, non-inferiority trial. Each of the 16 study centers performs the procedure with the best local expertise (PTBD or EUS-BD). In PTBD, bile duct access is performed by ultrasound guidance. EUS-BD is performed as an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS), EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) or EUS-guided antegrade stenting (EUS-AGS). Insertion of a metal stent is intended in both procedures in the first session. Primary end point is technical success. Secondary end points are clinical success, duration pf procedure, AEs graded by severity, length of hospital stay, re-intervention rate and survival within 6 months. The target case number is 212 patients (12 calculated dropouts included). Discussion This study might help to clarify whether PTBD is non-inferior to EUS-BD concerning technical success, and whether one of both interventions is superior in terms of efficacy and safety in one or more secondary endpoints. Randomization is not provided as both procedures are rarely used after failed endoscopic biliary drainage and study centers usually prefer one of both procedures that they can perform best

Biopsy Sampling in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy : A Survey from 10 Tertiary Referral Centres across Europe

Funding Information: A. Link reports grants from European Commission “Eu-ropäischer Fond für regionale Entwicklung” (EFRE), outside the submitted work. In Lithuania the work was partly supported by Lithuanian Research Council Grant no APP-2/2016. In Latvia, the methodological support was made available from the project lzp-2018/1-0135. This work was also supported by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care). In Barcelona, we thank the CERCA Programme/Generalitat de Catalunya for the support. Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.Background: Guidelines give robust recommendations on which biopsies should be taken when there is endoscopic suggestion of gastric inflammation. Adherence to these guidelines often seems arbitrary. This study aimed to give an overview on current practice in tertiary referral centres across Europe. Methods: Data were collected at 10 tertiary referral centres. Demographic data, the indication for each procedure, endoscopic findings, and the number and sampling site of biopsies were recorded. Findings were compared between centres, and factors influencing the decision to take biopsies were explored. Results: Biopsies were taken in 56.6% of 9,425 procedures, with significant variation between centres (p < 0.001). Gastric biopsies were taken in 43.8% of all procedures. Sampling location varied with the procedure indication (p < 0.001) without consistent pattern across the centres. Fewer biopsies were taken in centres which routinely applied the updated Sydney classification for gastritis assessment (46.0%), compared to centres where this was done only upon request (75.3%, p < 0.001). This was the same for centres stratifying patients according to the OLGA system (51.8 vs. 73.0%, p < 0.001). More biopsies were taken in centres following the MAPS guidelines on stomach surveillance (68.1 vs. 37.1%, p < 0.001). Biopsy sampling was more likely in younger patients in 8 centres (p < 0.05), but this was not true for the whole cohort (p = 0.537). The percentage of procedures with biopsies correlated directly with additional costs charged in case of biopsies (r = 0.709, p = 0.022). Conclusion: Adherence to guideline recommendations for biopsy sampling at gastroscopy was inconsistent across the participating centres. Our data suggest that centre-specific policies are applied instead.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Efficacy of Budesonide Orodispersible Tablets as Induction Therapy for Eosinophilic Esophagitis in a Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Swallowed topical-acting corticosteroids are recommended as first-line therapy for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Asthma medications not optimized for esophageal delivery are sometimes effective, although given off-label. We performed a randomized, placebo-controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of a budesonide orodispersible tablet (BOT), which allows the drug to be delivered to the esophagus in adults with active EoE. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, parallel study of 88 adults with active EoE in Europe. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that received BOT (1 mg twice daily; n = 59) or placebo (n = 29) for 6 weeks. The primary end point was complete remission, based on clinical and histologic factors, including dysphagia and odynophagia severity ≤2 on a scale of 0-10 on each of the 7 days before the end of the double-blind phase and a peak eosinophil count <5 eosinophils/high power field. Patients who did not achieve complete remission at the end of the 6-week double-blind phase were offered 6 weeks of open-label treatment with BOT (1 mg twice daily). RESULTS: At 6 weeks, 58% of patients given BOT were in complete remission compared with no patients given placebo (P < .0001). The secondary end point of histologic remission was achieved by 93% of patients given BOT vs no patients given placebo (P < .0001). After 12 weeks, 85% of patients had achieved remission. Six-week and 12-week BOT administration were safe and well tolerated; 5% of patients who received BOT developed symptomatic, mild candida, which was easily treated with an oral antifungal agent. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial of adults with active EoE, we found that budesonide oral tablets were significantly more effective than placebo in inducing clinical and histologic remission. Eudra-CT number 2014-001485-99; ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT02434029

Can a polyp detection and characterization system predict complete resection?

Introduction: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is one of the most evolving fields in endoscopy. We aimed to test if a system for polyp detection and polyp characterization can be used to predict complete endoscopic resection of colon adenomas. Methods: We used the CAD-Eye AI system (Fujifilm Europe) in consecutive patients who received polypectomy using a cold snare. After resection, the submucosal space was flushed with water using an irrigation pump. Images were obtained using the CAD Eye system, and the characterization of the system was noted and afterward compared to histology of the removed specimen. Results: In total, 17 polypectomies were observed, and in no case the AI was able to give information about resection status. First, the resection plane itself was classified as being adenomatous in all cases, while, second, all adenomas were resected completely, thus harboring no potential for overlying misinterpretations in the images. Conclusion: An AI system trained to characterize polyps in healthy surrounding colorectal mucosa cannot predict the state of resection after removal of the adenoma. This is explained by the training and programming. Endoscopists using AI from now on should learn about the basics of AI and the pitfalls in interpreting results from AI