Endoscopic minor papilla sphincterotomy in patients with complete pancreas divisum and acute recurrent pancreatitis: a metanalysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreas divisum (PD) is a congenital variant of the pancreatic ductal system and a potential cause of acute recurrent pancreatitis (ARP). Endoscopic minor papilla sphincterotomy (MiES) is the most common procedure performed in the management of PD-related ARP. The aim of this study is to perform a meta-analysis estimating the efficacy and the safety of MiES in the management of patients with PD-related ARP. METHODS: A research was performed in Pubmed, EMBASE and Web of science, the studies were reviewed and selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Evaluation of Heterogeneity and publication bias was performed, and a random effect model was used to estimate the effect size of each study. RESULTS: One hundred and thirteen articles were selected and reviewed, 13 met the inclusion criteria. All the studies were retrospective with a mean follow-up duration of 45.9 months. A total of 323 patients with PD-related ARP treated with MiES were included in the meta-analysis. The overall clinical success rate of MiES (defined as no further episodes of ARP, reduction of episodes of ARP, or improvement in quality of life) was of 77% (95%CI: 72%-81%; p = 0.30). Evaluating only the studies with clinical success rate defined as "no further AP in the follow-up" the clinical success rate was of 69.8% (95%CI: 61.3%-77.2%; p = 0.57), while evaluating the studies with other definitions (reduction of episodes of ARP or improvement in quality of life) the clinical success rate was of 81.2% (95%CI: 75.2%-86.1%; p = 0.45). The common fixed effects model disclosed a 25.5% overall adverse events rate (95%CI: 19.3%-32.8%; p = 0.42): acute pancreatitis in 14.3% (95%CI: 9.7%-20.6%; p = 0.36), bleeding in 5.6% (95%CI: 2.9%-10.4%; p = 0.98), and other adverse events in 5.6% (95%CI: 2.9%-10.4%; p = 0.67). CONCLUSION: MiES is an effective and relatively safe treatment in the management of PD-related ARP. The retrospective nature of the studies selected is the main limitations of this metanalysis. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these data.

A guide for assessing the clinical relevance of findings in small bowel capsule endoscopy: analysis of 8064 answers of international experts to an illustrated script questionnaire.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Although recommended, the P-score used for assessing the pertinence / relevance of findings seen in small bowel (SB) capsule endoscopy (CE) is based on a low level of knowledge. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical relevance of the most frequent SBCE findings through an illustrated script questionnaire. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen types of SBCE findings were illustrated four times each in three different settings (occult and overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding and suspected Crohn's disease), and with a variable number (n = 1/n = 2-5/n ≥ 6), thus providing a questionnaire with 192 scenarios and 576 illustrated questions. Fifteen international experts were asked to rate the finding's relevance for each question as very unlikely (-2) / unlikely (-1) / doubtful (0) / likely (+1) / very likely (+2). The median score (≤-0.75, between -0.75 and 0.75, or ≥0.75) obtained for each scenario determined a low (P0), intermediate (P1) or high (P2) relevance, respectively. RESULTS: 8064 answers were analyzed. Participation and completion rates were 93% and 100%, respectively. In overt or occult OGIB, resultant P2 findings were 'typical angiectasia', 'deep ulceration', 'stenosis', and'blood', whatever their numbers, and 'superficial ulcerations' when multiple. While in suspected CD, consensus P2 lesions were 'deep ulceration' and 'stenosis' whatever their numbers, and 'aphthoid erosions' and 'superficial ulcerations' when multiple. CONCLUSION: This study establishes a guide for the evaluation of relevance of SBCE findings. It represents a step forward for SB-CE interpretation and is intended to be used as a tool for teaching and academic research.

Excess Lead-210 and Plutonium-239+240: Two suitable radiogenic soil erosion tracers for mountain grassland sites.

The expected growing population and challenges associated with globalisation will increase local food and feed demands and enhance the pressure on local and regional upland soil resources. In light of these potential future developments it is necessary to define sustainable land use and tolerable soil loss rates with methods applicable and adapted to mountainous areas. Fallout-radionuclides (FRNs) are proven techniques to increase our knowledge about the status and resilience of agro-ecosystems. However, the use of the Caesium-137 (137Cs) method is complicated in the European Alps due to its heterogeneous input and the timing of the Chernobyl fallout, which occurred during a few single rain events on partly snow covered ground. Other radioisotopic techniques have been proposed to overcome these limitations. The objective of this study is to evaluate the suitability of excess Lead-210 (210Pbex) and Plutonium-239+240 (239+240Pu) as soil erosion tracers for three different grassland management types at the steep slopes (slope angles between 35 and 38°) located in the Central Swiss Alps. All three FRNs identified pastures as having the highest mean (± standard deviation) net soil loss of -6.7 ± 1.1, -9.8 ± 6.8 and -7.0 ± 5.2 Mg ha-1 yr-1 for 137Cs, 210Pbex and 239+240Pu, respectively. A mean soil loss of -5.7 ± 1.5, -5.2 ± 1.5 and-5.6 ± 2.1 was assessed for hayfields and the lowest rates were established for pastures with dwarf-shrubs (-5.2 ± 2.5, -4.5 ± 2.5 and -3.3 ± 2.4 Mg ha-1 yr-1 for 137Cs, 210Pbex and 239+240Pu, respectively). These rates, evaluated at sites with an elevated soil erosion risk exceed the respective soil production rates. Among the three FRN methods used, 239+240Pu appears as the most promising tracer in terms of measurement uncertainty and reduced small scale variability (CV of 13%). Despite a higher level of uncertainty, 210Pbex produced comparable results, with a wide range of erosion rates sensitive to changes in grassland management. 210Pbex can then be as well considered as a suitable soil tracer to investigate alpine agroecosystems.

Barriers against split-dose bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: Although split regimen is associated with higher adenoma detection and is recommended for elective colonoscopy, its adoption remains suboptimal. The identification of patient-related barriers may improve its implementation. Our aim was to assess patients' attitude towards split regimen and patient-related factors associated with its uptake. DESIGN: In a multicentre, prospective study, outpatients undergoing colonoscopy from 8:00 to 14:00 were given written instructions for 4 L polyethylene glycol bowel preparation, offering the choice between split-dose and day-before regimens and emphasising the superiority of split regimen on colonoscopy outcomes. Uptake of split regimen and association with patient-related factors were explored by a 20-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 1447 patients (mean age 59.2±13.5 years, men 54.3%), 61.7% and 38.3% chose a split-dose and day-before regimens, respectively. A linear correlation was observed between time of colonoscopy appointments and split-dose uptake, from 27.3% in 8:00 patients to 96% in 14:00 patients (p<0.001, χ2 for linear trend). At multivariate analysis, colonoscopy appointment before 10:00 (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.18), travel time to endoscopy service >1 h (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.79), low education level (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.96) and female gender (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.95) were inversely correlated with the uptake of split-dose. Overall, the risk of travel interruption and faecal incontinence was slightly increased in split regimen patients (3.0% vs 1.4% and 1.5% vs 0.9%, respectively; p=NS). Split regimen was an independent predictor of adequate colon cleansing (OR 3.34, 95% CI 2.40 to 4.63) and polyp detection (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.92). CONCLUSION: Patient attitude towards split regimen is suboptimal, especially for early morning examinations. Interventions to improve patient compliance (ie, policies to reorganise colonoscopy timetable, educational initiatives for patient and healthcare providers) should be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02287051; pre-result.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps. DESIGN: Relevant publications were identified in MEDLINE/EMBASE/Cochrane Central Register for the period 1966-2014. Studies in which ≥20 mm colorectal neoplastic lesions were treated with endoscopic resection were included. Rates of postendoscopic resection surgery due to non-curative resection or adverse events, as well as the rates of complete endoscopic removal, invasive cancer, adverse events, recurrence and mortality, were extracted. Study quality was ascertained according to Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Forest plot was produced based on random effect models. I2 statistic was used to describe the variation across studies due to heterogeneity. Meta-regression analysis was also performed. RESULTS: 50 studies including 6442 patients and 6779 large polyps were included in the analyses. Overall, 503 out of 6442 patients (pooled rate: 8%, 95% CI 7% to 10%, I2=78.6%) underwent surgery due to non-curative endoscopic resection, and 31/6442 (pooled rate: 1%, 95% CI 0.7% to 1.4%, I2=0%) to adverse events. Invasive cancer at histology, non-curative endoscopic resection, synchronous lesions and recurrence accounted for 58%, 28%, 2.2% and 5.9% of all the surgeries, respectively. Endoscopic perforation occurred in 96/6595 (1.5%, 95% CI 1.2% to 1.7%) polyps, while bleeding in 423/6474 (6.5%, 95% CI 5.9% to 7.1%). Overall, 5334 patients entered in surveillance, 502/5836 (8.6%, 95% CI 7.9% to 9.3%) being lost at follow-up. Endoscopic recurrence was detected in 735/5334 patients (13.8%, 95% CI 12.9% to 14.7%), being an invasive cancer in 14/5334 (0.3%, 95% CI 0.1% to 0.4%). Endoscopic treatment was successful in 664/735 cases (90.3%, 95% CI 88.2% to 92.5%). Mortality related with management of large polyps was reported in 5/6278 cases (0.08%, 95% CI 0.01% to 0.15%). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic resection of large polyps appeared to be an extremely effective and safe intervention. However, an adequate endoscopic surveillance is necessary for its long-term efficacy.

A Simple Evaluation Tool (ET-CET) Indicates Increase of Diagnostic Skills From Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Training Courses: A Prospective Observational European Multicenter Study.

Small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) has become a first line diagnostic tool. Several training courses with a similar format have been established in Europe; however, data on learning curve and training in SBCE remain sparse.Between 2008 and 2011, different basic SBCE training courses were organized internationally in UK (n = 2), Italy (n = 2), Germany (n = 2), Finland (n = 1), and nationally in Germany (n = 10), applying similar 8-hour curricula with 50% lectures and 50% hands-on training. The Given PillCam System was used in 12 courses, the Olympus EndoCapsule system in 5, respectively. A simple evaluation tool for capsule endoscopy training (ET-CET) was developed using 10 short SBCE videos including relevant lesions and normal or irrelevant findings. For each video, delegates were required to record a diagnosis (achievable total score from 0 to 10) and the clinical relevance (achievable total score 0 to 10). ET-CET was performed at baseline before the course and repeated, with videos in altered order, after the course.Two hundred ninety-four delegates (79.3% physicians, 16.3% nurses, 4.4% others) were included for baseline analysis, 268 completed the final evaluation. Forty percent had no previous experience in SBCE, 33% had performed 10 or less procedures. Median scores for correct diagnosis improved from 4.0 (IQR 3) to 7.0 (IQR 3) during the courses (P < 0.001, Wilcoxon), and for correct classification of relevance of the lesions from 5.0 (IQR 3) to 7.0 (IQR 3) (P < 0.001), respectively. Improvement was not dependent on experience, profession, SBCE system, or course setting. Previous experience in SBCE was associated with higher baseline scores for correct diagnosis (P < 0.001; Kruskal-Wallis). Additionally, independent nonparametric partial correlation with experience in gastroscopy (rho 0.33) and colonoscopy (rho 0.27) was observed (P < 0.001).A simple ET-CET demonstrated significant improvement of diagnostic skills on completion of formal basic SBCE courses with hands-on training, regardless of preexisting experience, profession, and course setting. Baseline scores for correct diagnoses show a plateau after interpretation of 25 SBCE before courses, supporting this number as a compromise for credentialing. Experience in flexible endoscopy may be useful before attending an SBCE course.

Clinical indications for computed tomographic colonography: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) Guideline

This is an official guideline of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR). It addresses the clinical indications for the use of computed tomographic colonography (CTC). A targeted literature search was performed to evaluate the evidence supporting the use of CTC. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. Main recommendations 1 ESGE/ESGAR recommend computed tomographic colonography (CTC) as the radiological examination of choice for the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia. ESGE/ESGAR do not recommend barium enema in this setting (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). 2 ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC, preferably the same or next day, if colonoscopy is incomplete. Delay of CTC should be considered following endoscopic resection. In the case of obstructing colorectal cancer, preoperative contrast-enhanced CTC may also allow location or staging of malignant lesions (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). 3 When endoscopy is contraindicated or not possible, ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an acceptable and equally sensitive alternative for patients with symptoms suggestive of colorectal cancer (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). 4 ESGE/ESGAR recommend referral for endoscopic polypectomy in patients with at least one polyp  ≥  6  mm in diameter detected at CTC. CTC surveillance may be clinically considered if patients do not undergo polypectomy (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). 5 ESGE/ESGAR do not recommend CTC as a primary test for population screening or in individuals with a positive first-degree family history of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, it may be proposed as a CRC screening test on an individual basis providing the screenee is adequately informed about test characteristics, benefits, and risks (weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence).

Systematic review with meta-analysis: the incidence of advanced neoplasia after polypectomy in patients with and without low-risk adenomas.

BACKGROUND: Patients with one to two tubular adenomas <1 cm in size without high-grade dysplasia (low-risk group) are considered at low risk for colorectal cancer. However, it is uncertain whether they have the same risk of subsequent advanced neoplasia as those with no neoplasia at baseline colonoscopy. AIM: To compare incidence of metachronous advanced neoplasia between patients in the low-risk adenoma group and those without neoplasia at index colonoscopy. METHODS: Relevant publications were identified by MEDLINE/EMBASE and other databases for the period 1992-2013. Studies comparing the incidence of post-polypectomy advanced neoplasia (adenomas ≥10 mm/high-grade dysplasia/villous or cancer) between the low-risk group and patients without colorectal neoplasia at the first colonoscopy were included. Detection rates for advanced neoplasia at endoscopic surveillance were extracted. Study quality was ascertained according to Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Forest plot was produced based on random-effect models. Inter-study heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic. RESULTS: Seven studies provided data on 11 387 patients. Mean surveillance periods ranged between 2 and 5 years. Altogether, 267 patients with post-polypectomy advanced neoplasia were detected in the two groups. The incidence of advanced neoplasia was 1.6% (119/7308) in those without neoplasia and 3.6% (148/4079) in those with low-risk adenoma, respectively, corresponding to a relative risk of 1.8 (95% CI: 1.3-2.6). Inter-study heterogeneity was only moderate (I(2) : 37%). No publication bias was present. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low-risk adenomas at baseline had a higher risk of metachronous advanced neoplasia than the group with no adenomas at baseline, though the absolute risk was low in both groups.

Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). It addresses the choice amongst regimens available for cleansing the colon in preparation for colonoscopy. METHODS: This Guideline is based on a targeted literature search to evaluate the evidence supporting the use of bowel preparation for colonoscopy. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendation and the quality of evidence. RESULTS: The main recommendations are as follows. (1) The ESGE recommends a low-fiber diet on the day preceding colonoscopy (weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence). (2) The ESGE recommends a split regimen of 4 L of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution (or a same-day regimen in the case of afternoon colonoscopy) for routine bowel preparation. A split regimen (or same-day regimen in the case of afternoon colonoscopy) of 2 L PEG plus ascorbate or of sodium picosulphate plus magnesium citrate may be valid alternatives, in particular for elective outpatient colonoscopy (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). In patients with renal failure, PEG is the only recommended bowel preparation. The delay between the last dose of bowel preparation and colonoscopy should be minimized and no longer than 4 hours (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). (3) The ESGE advises against the routine use of sodium phosphate for bowel preparation because of safety concerns (strong recommendation, low quality evidence).

Colon capsule endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline.

PillCam colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is an innovative noninvasive, and painless ingestible capsule technique that allows exploration of the colon without the need for sedation and gas insufflation. Although it is already available in European and other countries, the clinical indications for CCE as well as the reporting and work-up of detected findings have not yet been standardized. The aim of this evidence-based and consensus-based guideline, commissioned by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) is to furnish healthcare providers with a comprehensive framework for potential implementation of this technique in a clinical setting.

Advance in diagnosis and treatment of small bowel tumors: a single-center report.

BACKGROUND: The past decade has seen significant advances in the evaluation of the small bowel, long considered as the "black box" in gastroenterology. The development of several endoscopic techniques, including capsule endoscopy (CE) and double (DBE)- and single (SBE)-balloon enteroscopy, has improved the evaluation of this part of the gut and led to reach a more precise preoperative diagnosis of small-bowel tumors. These rare tumors were previously diagnosed only after laparotomy, although laparoscopic advanced surgery can be used for minimally invasive therapeutic approach in these patients. This study was designed to evaluate the diagnostic and therapeutic impact of endoscopic procedures on small-bowel tumors. METHODS: During October 2010, 148 SBE procedures were performed; in 14 patients (7 males and 7 females, mean age 58.8 years; range 37-82 years) who suffered from obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, with previous negative upper and lower GI endoscopy, a diagnosis of small-bowel tumor was suspected according to CT scan (7 cases) and/or CE (11 patients). Then, an enteroscopy was performed. RESULTS: Multiple biopsies were taken in 9 cases; endoscopic tattoos were performed in 11 cases. After endoscopic procedures, histological examination showed melanoma in one case, adenocarcinoma in seven, and adenoma in one case. In 11 of 14 patients, a laparoscopic partial resection of small bowel involved was possible due to endoscopic tattoos. In one patient, the involvement of colic segment precluded a laparoscopic resection. In two patients, the laparoscopic resection was not possible for technical problems. Histological findings on resected specimens were indicative for melanoma in one case, gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) in four cases, gastrointestinal autonomic nerve tumor (GANT) in one case, adenoma in one, and adenocarcinoma in seven cases. CONCLUSIONS: New development of different endoscopic approaches to the small bowel has led to reach an earlier diagnosis of small-bowel tumors and a preoperative diagnosis with consequent minimally invasive surgical approach.

Cost effectiveness and projected national impact of colorectal cancer screening in France.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in France. Only scanty data on cost-effectiveness of CRC screening in Europe are available, generating uncertainty over its efficiency. Although immunochemical fecal tests (FIT) and guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests (g-FOBT) have been shown to be cost-effective in France, cost-effectiveness of endoscopic screening has not yet been addressed. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness of screening strategies using colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, second-generation colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), FIT and g-FOBT were compared using a Markov model. A 40 % adherence rate was assumed for all strategies. Colonoscopy costs included anesthesiologist assistance. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. Probabilistic and value-of-information analyses were used to estimate the expected benefit of future research. A third-payer perspective was adopted. RESULTS: In the reference case analysis, FIT repeated every year was the most cost-effective strategy, with an ICER of €48165 per life-year gained vs. FIT every 2 years, which was the next most cost-effective strategy. Although CCE every 5 years was as effective as FIT 1-year, it was not a cost-effective alternative. Colonoscopy repeated every 10 years was substantially more costly, and slightly less effective than FIT 1-year. When projecting the model outputs onto the French population, the least (g-FOBT 2-years) and most (FIT 1-year) effective strategies reduced the absolute number of annual CRC deaths from 16037 to 12916 and 11217, respectively, resulting in an annual additional cost of €26 million and €347 million, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that FIT 1-year was the optimal choice in 20% of the simulated scenarios, whereas sigmoidoscopy 5-years, colonoscopy, and FIT 2-years were the optimal choices in 40%, 26%, and 14%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A screening program based on FIT 1-year appeared to be the most cost-effective approach for CRC screening in France. However, a substantial uncertainty over this choice is still present.

Single-balloon push-and-pull enteroscopy system: does it work? A single-center, 3-year experience.

BACKGROUND: The last decade has seen significant advances in the evaluation of the small bowel. Several endoscopic techniques have been developed in recent years: capsule endoscopy (CE), double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE), and, more recently, the single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE). The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic and therapeutic impact, safety, and feasibility of the SBE procedure after a 3-year experience. METHODS: A total of 73 SBE procedures were performed from July 2006 to July 2009. The starting insertion route (oral or anal) of SBE was chosen according to the estimated location of the suspected lesions based on the clinical presentation and, in 48 patients, on the findings of CE. A total of 70 patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (31), suspected malabsorption syndrome (12), polyposis syndromes (11), suspected Crohn's disease (9), and suspected gastrointestinal tumors (7) were recruited. RESULTS: The SBE was not carried out in four patients because of technical problems. Multiple angiodysplasias were found and treated in 9 patients; Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), and multiple polypectomies were carried out in 8 patients; endoscopic tattoos were performed in 2 patients due to the large diameter of the polyps; and multiple biopsies was performed in only one patient. SBE diagnosed Crohn's disease in four patients, malabsorption syndromes in two, lymphangiectasia in two, eosinophilic enteritis in one, melanoma in one, and nonspecific inflammation in eight. A total of seven small-bowel tumors were diagnosed (all were tattooed). In 23/70 patients the exam was negative. No major complications occurred. CONCLUSION: Single-balloon enteroscopy seems to be safe, useful, and highly effective in the diagnosis and therapy of several small-bowel diseases.

European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE): recommendations (2009) on clinical use of video capsule endoscopy to investigate small-bowel, esophageal and colonic diseases.

These recommendations on video capsule endoscopy, an emerging technology with an impact on the practice of endoscopy, were developed by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guidelines Committee. The first draft of each section was prepared by one or two members of the writing team, who were selected as experts on the content of that section on the basis of their published work. They used evidence-based methodology, performing MEDLINE and PubMed literature searches to identify relevant clinical studies. Abstracts from scientific meetings were included only if there was no published full paper on a particular topic. If there was disagreement, the first author of the Guideline made the final decision. Recommendations were graded according to the strength of the supporting evidence. The draft guideline was critically reviewed by all authors and submitted to the ESGE councillors for their critical review before approval of the final document. The ESGE Guidelines Committee acknowledges that this document is based on a critical review of the data available at the time of preparation and that further studies may be needed to clarify some aspects. Moreover, this Guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. This document should be regarded as supplying recommendations only to gastroenterologists in providing care to their patients. It is not a set of rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care, or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. These recommendations must be interpreted according to the clinician's knowledge, expertise, and clinical judgment in the management of individual patients and, if necessary, a course of action that varies from recommendations must be undertaken.

Endoscopic gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis: technical and clinical results.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Cholecystectomy is the standard treatment for acute cholecystitis while percutaneous drainage is reserved for high-risk patients. The aim of the present study was to assess the technical success rate and clinical efficacy of endoscopic gallbladder drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 35 consecutive patients with acute cholecystitis and without residual common bile duct obstruction were retrospectively identified. Patients were stratified according to the pathogenesis and stages of acute cholecystitis, and the morphology of the cystic duct and/or its insertion in the common bile duct. Primary outcomes were technical success and early and late clinical success. RESULTS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was performed within the first 72 hours in 19 patients (54%). Technical success was achieved in 29 patients (83%); drainage was nasocholecystic in 21 of these (72%), plastic stenting in 6 (21%), and a combined method in 2 (7%). The pathogenesis and stage of acute cholecystitis, and the morphology both of the cystic duct and its insertion in the common bile duct, did not influence technical success. Clinical success was achieved in 24 cases (83%) after a median of 3 days (range 2-12). Four patients (14%) died within 3 days due to septic complications, and one accidentally removed the nasocholecystic drain after 24 hours. Late results, available in 21 patients after a median follow-up of 17 months, showed relapse of acute cholecystitis in 2 (10%) (both with stents) and of biliary pain in 2 patients (10%), both of whom had nasocholecystic drainage. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic gallbladder drainage seems feasible and effective in resolving acute cholecystitis, but only as a temporary measure because of a 20% relapse rate in long-term follow-up. Prospective studies are necessary to identify which patients would benefit most from this endoscopic technique in the short and long term.