Modification of pepsinogen I levels and their correlation with gastrointestinal injury after administration of dexibuprofen, ibuprofen or diclofenac: a randomized, open-label, controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a 2-week treatment with dexibuprofen, in comparison with ibuprofen and diclofenac, on pepsinogen plasma concentrations and gastrointestinal mucosa, as well as the correlation of these changes with gastrointestinal mucosal injury. METHODS: 60 patients with rheumatologic disease in chronic therapy with NSAID, were included. After a 7-day run-in period patients were randomly assigned to receive a 14-day treatment with dexibuprofen (Group A; Day 1 - 3 = 400 mg t.i.d; Day 4 - 14 = 400 mg b.i.d.), ibuprofen (Group B; Day 1 - 3 = 800 mg t.i.d; Day 4 -14 = 800 mg b.i.d.) or diclofenac (Group C; Day 1 - 3 = 50 mg t.i.d; Day 4 - 14 = 50 mg b.i.d.). Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (Day 15), capsule-endoscopy (Day 16, 7 patients of each group) and determination of pepsinogen plasma concentrations were performed (basal and Day 15). A semiquantitative scale was designed for the assessment of the gastrointestinal mucosa. RESULTS: No differences in plasma pepsinogen were found between treatment groups or gastrointestinal injury grades or between basal and post-therapy determinations. Dexibuprofen showed gastroduodenal mucosal injury in fewer patients (42.1%) than was the case with ibuprofen (5%; p = 0.003) and diclofenac (30%; p = N.S.). Dexibuprofen administration was also associated with more patients having no intestinal mucosal damage (42.86% vs. 28.7% in the diclofenac group and 14.29% in the ibuprofen group; p = 0.0175). The rate of clinical adverse events was similar in Groups A, B and C (28%, 38% and 34%). CONCLUSIONS: Dexibuprofen showed a lower rate of gastroduodenal and intestinal mucosal injury. This effect was not mediated by modifications of plasma pepsinogen levels.

The value of capsule endoscopy in pediatric patients with a suspicion of Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and usefulness of capsule endoscopy (CE) in pediatric patients with a suspicion of Crohn's disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CE was used in 12 patients (four girls, eight boys; age 12-16; weight range 43-87 kg). The indication was a clinical suspicion of Crohn's disease not confirmed with traditional methods. Gastroscopy, colonoscopy, and small-bowel follow-through examinations were carried out in all of the patients, without any diagnostic findings. Ileoscopy was possible in 50 % of the patients, and the ileal mucosa and biopsies were normal in all cases. RESULTS: The capsule was easily swallowed by all of the patients. They all excreted the capsule normally, and no complications were observed in any case. CE identified lesions suggestive of Crohn's disease in seven of the 12 (58.3 %), and the majority of the lesions were in the ileum. CONCLUSIONS: CE is safe in pediatric patients over 12 years of age. The procedure appears to be a very useful diagnostic tool in children with Crohn's disease.

Usefulness of capsule endoscopy in patients with suspected small bowel disease.

AIM: To study the usefulness and safety of capsule endoscopy as a diagnostic tool in various small bowel disorders. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of a series of cases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between August 2001 and August 2002, 92 capsule endoscopy procedures were performed in 88 patients (53M/39F, age: 43.87 +/- 16.78). Indications included: chronic diarrhea (n=33); unknown abdominal pain (n=29); occult gastrointestinal bleeding or iron-deficiency anemia (n=13); abdominal discomfort in NSAID takers (n=7); staging of gastrointestinal tumors (n=4), and asymptomatic controls (n=2). Previously performed gastroscopy, colonoscopy, and small-bowel follow-through were not conclusive in all patients. RESULTS: Most frequently relevant findings included: jejuno-ileal aphtas and ulcerations (29 patients), vascular malformations (13 patients), and intestinal neoplasm (6 patients). The groups with a higher rate of findings related to this indication were occult gastrointestinal bleeding (76.92%) and chronic diarrhea (67.85%), with the lowest rate in the abdominal pain group (34.48%). Therapeutic strategy was directly changed in 36 of 88 patients (40.90%) because of capsule-endoscopic findings. The only observed complication was the failed excretion of one of the capsules because of an unknown ulcerated intestinal stricture. CONCLUSIONS: Capsule endoscopy is a safe procedure which can study the entire small bowel, meaning a valuable tool for the management of patients with suggestive signs and symptoms of intestinal disorders.

Capsule endoscopy in patients with suspected Crohn's disease and negative endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The aim of the present study was to assess the value of capsule endoscopy in the diagnostic work-up of patients in whom there is a clinical suspicion of small bowel Crohn's disease that cannot be confirmed using traditional techniques. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 21 patients (14 men, seven women; mean age 43 +/- 8 years) with a clinical and biochemical suspicion of Crohn's disease were included in the study. Conventional imaging work-up, including upper and lower endoscopy, as well as a small-bowel follow-through, was carried out in all of the patients. RESULTS: Pathological findings were not observed in 12 of the 21 patients (57 %). In the other nine patients (43 %), lesions supporting the diagnosis of Crohn's disease were seen. The most frequent findings were located in the distal ileum and included aphthae, lineal and serpiginous ulcers, and fissures. Four patients had lesions in the jejunum. One patient showed erosions in the distal duodenum, jejunum, and ileum. No adverse effects of the technique were observed in any of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Capsule endoscopy is a valuable diagnostic tool in patients with suspected Crohn's disease that has not been confirmed using standard imaging techniques.

Short- and medium-term clinical efficacy of three endoscopic therapies for achalasia: a single-blinded prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: to compare the efficacy of three endoscopic therapies for achalasia and to identify predictors of response. DESIGN: prospective, single-blinded study at short and medium term. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 22 patients (9M/13 F; mean age: 47.45 +/- 21.01 years) with confirmed clinical and manometric achalasia were randomised in three groups: intrasphincteric injections of botulinum toxin (group 1: 10 patients ), injections of 1% polidocanol (group 2:6 patients), and a combined therapy with both of them (group 3: 6 patients). Clinical response was evaluated by a score (0-5) of tested symptoms (dysphagia, regurgitation and chest pain) at 1 and 24 weeks post-treatment. RESULTS: at 24 weeks post-treatment group 2 had the best complete response (CR) rate (33.33%), whereas CR in both the botulinum toxin and combined therapy groups was 10 and 0%, respectively. Groups 1 and 2 got an overall improvement in clinical score at 1 (p= 0.02) and 24 weeks (p= 0.04). Five patients (50%) in group 1, two patients (33.33%) in group 2, and three patients (50%) in group 3 needed other therapies (dilation or surgery) because of treatment failure. Separately, neither age nor sex, time from diagnosis or type of therapy could distinguish responders from non-responders in these three groups. However, absence of response within the first week, and an initial clinical score above 7 were predictive factors of poor response at six months. CONCLUSIONS: short- and medium-term clinical response to these endoscopic therapies was limited. The absence of response at seven days and a severe initial clinical score were predictive factors of poor medium-term response.

Long-term management of GERD. Why using endoscopy just now?

Early results with the use of endoscopic techniques in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have been recently reported. Methods used are an injection of biocompatible substances within the lower oesophageal sphincter (LES), LES ablation using radio-frequency, and suture of folds in the area distal to the Z-line. The latter--endoscopic gastroplasty--is most difficult, but this technique has been most widely accepted by gastroenterologists to this date. Effectiveness of these endoscopic management systems in the long-term control of GERD has never been compared to a control group. This fact, together with the proven efficacy of anti-secretory drugs and the refinement of laparoscopic surgery during the past few years, has led physicians to be more demanding regarding early results. This review will discuss each method available, and issues answered by reported studies to this day are approached.