Achalasia-an unnecessary long way to diagnosis.

Although achalasia presents with typical symptoms such as dysphagia, regurgitation, weight loss, and atypical chest pain, the time until first diagnosis often takes years and is frustrating for patients and nevertheless associated with high costs for the healthcare system. A total of 563 patients were interviewed with confirmed diagnosis of achalasia regarding their symptoms leading to diagnosis along with past clinical examinations and treatments. Included were patients who had undergone their medical investigations in Germany. Overall, 527 study subjects were included (male 46%, female 54%, mean age at time of interview 51 ± 14.8 years). Dysphagia was present in 86.7%, regurgitation in 82.9%, atypical chest pain in 79%, and weight loss in 58% of patients before diagnosis. On average, it took 25 months (Interquartile Range (IQR) 9-65) until confirmation of correct diagnosis of achalasia. Though, diagnosis was confirmed significantly quicker (35 months IQR 9-89 vs. 20 months IQR 8-53; p < 0.01) in the past 15 years. The majority (72.1%) was transferred to three or more specialists. Almost each patient underwent at least one esophagogastroduodenoscopy (94.2%) and one radiological assessment (89.3%). However, esophageal manometry was performed in 70.4% of patients only. The severity of symptoms was independent with regard to duration until first diagnosis (Eckardt score 7.14 ± 2.64 within 12 months vs. 7.29 ± 2.61 longer than 12 months; P = 0.544). Fifty-five percent of the patients primarily underwent endoscopic dilatation and 37% a surgical myotomy. Endoscopic dilatation was realized significantly faster compared to esophageal myotomy (1 month IQR 0-4 vs. 3 months IQR 1-11; p < 0.001). Although diagnosis of achalasia was significantly faster in the past 15 years, it still takes almost 2 years until the correct diagnosis of achalasia is confirmed. Alarming is the fact that although esophageal manometry is known as the gold standard to differentiate primary motility disorders, only three out of four patients had undergone this diagnostic pathway during their diagnostic work-up. Better education of medical professionals and broader utilization of highly sensitive diagnostic tools, such as high-resolution manometry, are strictly necessary in order to correctly diagnose affected patients and to offer therapy faster.

Comparison of resection and transarterial chemoembolisation in the treatment of advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma--a single-center experience.

AIMS: The aim of this study is to evaluate factors associated with the outcome after surgical resection and to compare the efficacy of surgery to transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) in patients with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 273 patients with IHC treated in our department between 1997 and 2012 were included in our study. Patients were divided according to therapy into surgical (n = 130), TACE (n = 32), and systemic chemotherapy/best supportive care (n = 111) groups. Clinicopathological characteristics and survival were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates in patients after surgical resection were 60%, 40%, and 23%, respectively. Recurrence occurred in 63 percent of patients after R0 resection. Median time of recurrence-free survival was 14 months. Univariate analysis revealed nine significant risk factors for overall survival in the resection group: major surgery, extrahepatic resection, vascular and bile duct resection, lymph node invasion, poor tumour differentiation, positive surgical margin, multiple lesions, tumour diameter, and UICC-Stage. Multivariate analysis showed that lymph node metastasis (P < 0.001), poor tumour differentiation (P = 0.002), and positive resection margins (P = 0.001) were independent prognostic factors for survival. Median survival as well as overall survival rates of TACE patients were comparable to those of lymph node positive patients and patients with tumour positive surgical margins. CONCLUSIONS: R0 resection in patients with negative lymph node status remains the best chance for long-term survival in patients with IHC. There is no significant survival benefit of surgery in lymph node positive patients or patients with positive resection margin over TACE.