Treatment of patients with gastric variceal hemorrhage: endoscopic N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate injection versus balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Our study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic results of endoscopic N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate injection (EBC) and balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) in patients with gastric variceal hemorrhage (GVH) and/or high-risk gastric varices (GV). METHODS: Twenty-seven patients with GVH and/or high-risk GV (>or= 5 mm in diameter, those with red spots, and a Child-Pugh grading of B or C liver cirrhosis) who were treated with either EBC or BRTO from April 2005 to December 2007 were included in our study. RESULTS: EBC or BRTO was initially used for the treatment of GVH in 14 and 13 patients, respectively. Technical success was achieved in all 14 patients (100%) initially treated with EBC, and 10 of 13 patients (76.9%) initially treated with BRTO. Significant rebleeding occurred in 10 patients (71.4%) of the EBC group, and two patients (15.4%) of BRTO group (P < 0.01). Five of six patients (83.3%) treated with rescue BRTO due to rebleeding after initial EBC achieved technical success, and all six patients who were treated with rescue BRTO had no rebleeding during the median follow up of 17 (range: 2-37) months. The cumulative survival rate of the EBC with the BRTO rescue group/BRTO group was significantly higher than the EBC group. CONCLUSION: The therapeutic efficacies of EBC and BRTO for the treatment of active GVH and/or high-risk GV appeared to be similar. However, EBC might be associated with a higher rebleeding rate than BRTO. BRTO could be an effective rescue treatment for patients with GVH after initial treatment of EBC.

[The clinical usefulness of focally enhanced gastritis in Korean patients with Crohn's disease].

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Focally enhanced gastritis (FEG) has been suggested as a specific diagnostic marker for patients with Crohn's disease (CD). However, the usefulness of FEG for distinguishing CD from ulcerative colitis (UC) is uncertain and the incidence or prevalence of FEG for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients in Korea has not been defined yet. In this study, we investigated the frequency of FEG and other gastric histological abnormalities in Korean patients with CD and UC. METHODS: We evaluated 37 patients with known CD, 43 patients with UC and 41 non-IBD control group; all underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy followed by biopsy from the antrum and the body. The pathology of the gastric biopsy specimens and the presence of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) were evaluated. FEG was characterized by a focal perifoveolar or periglandular inflammatory cell infiltrates. RESULTS: H. pylori positive gastritis was found in 10 of 37 (27.0%) of CD patients, in 16 of 43 (37.2%) of UC patients, and in 22 of 41 (53.7%) of non-IBD control group (p=0.054). In H. pylori-negative patients, FEG was found in 8 of 27 patients (29.6%) of CD patients, 6 of 27 (22.2%) patients with UC, and 2 of 9 (10.5%) of non-IBD control group (p=0.324). CONCLUSIONS: In H. pylori-negative patients, there was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of FEG among CD, UC and control groups in Korea.

[Comparison of Helicobacter pylori eradication rate in patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia and peptic ulcer diseases according to proton pump inhibitors].

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Conflicting results have been reported whether patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia (NUD) respond differently to Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication treatment compared with patients with peptic ulcer diseases (PUD). The aim of this study was to evaluate any difference in H. pylori eradication rates between patients with NUD and PUD according to each proton pump inhibitor (PPI). METHODS: From September, 2004 to April, 2007, we retrospectively reviewed 2,297 patients with NUD (1,050 patients) or PUD (1,247 patients) infected with H. pylori. All patients received a standard 1 week triple therapy comprising of one of the five PPIs (pantoprazole, esomeprazole, omeprazole, lansoprazole, rabeprazole), clarithromycin and amoxicillin. The follow-up H. pylori test was performed 4 weeks after the completion of therapy. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the eradication rates between the two groups. In comparison of eradication rates according to PPI, omeprazole- based triple therapy group showed higher eradication rate than other groups in patients with NUD, but not in patients with PUD. CONCLUSIONS: This study failed to show any difference in H. pylori eradication rate between patients with NUD and PUD. There is no convincing evidence that the eradication rate may be affected by different PPI.

[Effectiveness of 10 day-sequential therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication in Korea].

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Antibiotic resistance and poor compliance are the main causes of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication failure. Proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based triple therapy is the most preferred regimen in clinical practice. However, a critical fall in the H. pylori eradication rate has been observed in the recent years. A novel 10 day-sequential therapy consists of five days of dual therapy followed by five days of triple therapy regimen has recently been described. We aimed to evaluate whether 10 day-sequential therapy eradicated H. pylori infection better than the PPI-based triple therapy in Korea. METHODS: 158 patients with proven H. pylori infection were randomized to receive either 10 day-sequential therapy (20 mg of omeprazole, 1.0 g of amoxicillin, each administered twice daily for the first 5 days, followed by 20 mg of omeprazole, 500 mg of clarithromycin, 500 mg of metronidazole, each administered twice daily for the remaining 5 days) or PPI-based triple therapy (20 mg of omeprazole, 1.0 g of amoxicillin, 500 mg of clarithromycin, each administered twice daily for 1 week). Outcome of eradication therapy was assessed 8 weeks after the cessation of treatment. RESULTS: Eradication rates of 10 day-sequential therapy and PPI-based triple therapy were 77.9% (60/77) and 71.6% (58/81) by intention to treat analysis, respectively (p=0.361). By per protocol analysis, eradication rates of 10 day-sequential therapy and triple therapy were 85.7% (60/70) and 76.6% (58/76), respectively (p=0.150). There were no significant differences in adverse event rates and treatment compliance between two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The 10 day-sequential therapy regimen failed to achieve significantly higher eradication rates than PPI-based triple therapy.