Is transcatheter arterial embolization a safer alternative than surgery when endoscopic therapy fails in bleeding duodenal ulcer?

OBJECTIVE: Emergency surgery after unsuccessful endoscopic therapy for bleeding duodenal ulcer has been reported to have a high mortality. Transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) of the gastroduodenal artery is an alternative strategy when endoscopic therapy fails. This study is a retrospective analysis comparing these two treatment strategies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who underwent TAE (n = 24) or open surgery (n = 50) after unsuccessful endoscopic therapy for bleeding duodenal ulcers at two university hospitals between 2000 and 2007 were compared. Mortality, morbidity, length of hospital stay, age, number of endoscopic interventions and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score were evaluated. RESULTS: The groups were comparable concerning gender and length of hospital stay. The mean age (69.6 +/- 16.1 versus 61.9 +/- 14.1 years; P = 0.043), APACHE II score (17.0 +/- 5.1 versus 12.8 +/- 5.7; P = 0.004) and number of gastroscopies (P = 0.009) were significantly higher in the embolization group. Five patients (20.8%) died in the embolization group compared to 11 (22%) in the surgery group. However, mortality in high-risk patients (APACHE II score >or= 16.5) was lower in the TAE group (23.1% versus 50.0%; P = 0.236). Method-related as well as other complications were not significantly different between the two groups. There was, however, a higher re-bleeding rate in the TAE group. CONCLUSIONS: TAE of the gastroduodenal artery appears to be a safe alternative when endoscopic therapy for bleeding duodenal ulcer fails, at least in high-risk patients. The role of TAE in low-risk patients with bleeding from duodenal ulcer needs to be defined by means of a prospective controlled trial.

Angiotensin II receptors are expressed and functional in human esophageal mucosa.

Only few studies have been devoted to the actions of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) in the human gastrointestinal tract. The present study was undertaken to elucidate the expression and action of RAS in the human esophageal mucosa. Mucosal specimens with normal histological appearance were obtained from healthy subjects undergoing endoscopy and from patients undergoing esophagectomy due to neoplasm. Gene and protein expressions of angiotensin II (Ang II) receptor type 1 (AT(1)) and type 2 (AT(2)) and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) were analyzed. In vivo functionality in healthy volunteers was reflected by assessing transmucosal potential difference (PD). Ussing chamber technique was used to analyze the different effects of Ang II on its AT(1) and AT(2) receptors. Immunoreactivity to AT(1) and AT(2) was localized to stratum superficiale and spinosum in the epithelium. ACE, AT(1), and AT(2) were found in blood vessel walls. Transmucosal PD in vivo increased following administration of the AT(1) receptor antagonist candesartan. In Ussing preparations mean basal transmural PD was -6.4 mV, epithelial current (I(ep)) 34 muA/cm(2), and epithelial resistance (R(ep)) 321 Omega.cm(2). Serosal exposure to Ang II increased PD as a result of increased I(ep), whereas R(ep) was constant. Ang II given together with the selective AT(1)-receptor antagonist losartan, or AT(2) agonist C21 given alone, resulted in a similar effect. Ang II given in presence of the AT(2)-receptor antagonist PD123319 did not influence PD, but I(ep) decreased and R(ep) increased. In conclusion, Ang II receptors and ACE are expressed in the human esophageal epithelium. The results suggest that AT(2)-receptor stimulation increases epithelial ion transport, whereas the AT(1) receptor inhibits ion transport and increases R(ep).

EUS-guided drainage is more successful in pancreatic pseudocysts compared with abscesses.

AIM: To compare the results for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of clear fluid pancreatic pseudocysts with the results for abscess drainage. METHODS: All patients referred for endoscopic drainage of a fluid collection were prospectively included. The outcome was recorded. RESULTS: Altogether 26 pseudocysts or abscesses were treated in 25 (6 female) patients. One endoscopist performed the procedures. Non-infected pseudocysts were present in 15 patients and 10 patients had infected fluid collections. The cyst size ranged between 28 cm × 13 cm and 5 cm × 5 cm. The EUS drainage was successful in 94% of the pseudocysts and in 80% of the abscesses (P = 0.04). The complication rate in pseudocysts was 6% and in abscesses was 30% (P = 0.02). Recurrence of a pseudocyst occurred in one patient (4%) after 6 mo; the patient was successfully retreated. CONCLUSION: EUS-guided drainage of pseudocysts is associated with a higher success rate and a lower complication rate compared with abscess drainage.

Efficacy of an anterior as compared with a posterior laparoscopic partial fundoplication: results of a randomized, controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and mechanical consequences of 2 partial fundoplications performed laparoscopically under the framework of a randomized, controlled clinical trial. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Although laparoscopic total fundoplication procedures have proven their effectiveness in the control of gastroesophageal reflux, problems remain with the functional consequences after a supra-competent gastric cardia high-pressure zone. Partial fundoplications have been found to be associated with fewer mechanical side effects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During a 2-year period, 95 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease were enrolled into a randomized, controlled single-institution clinical trial comparing a partial posterior (Toupét, n = 48) fundoplication and an anterior partial wrap (Watson, n = 47). All patients were assessed postoperatively at predefined time points, and the 12-month follow-up data are presented in terms of clinical results and 24-hour pH monitoring variables. RESULTS: Both patient groups were strictly comparable at the time of randomization. All operations were completed laparoscopically, and no serious complications were encountered. During the first postoperative year, a difference regarding the control of reflux symptoms was observed in favor of the posterior fundoplication. Esophageal acid exposure (% time pH <4) was substantially reduced by both operations but to a significantly lower level after a Toupét compared with the Watson partial fundoplication (1.0 +/- 0.3 vs. 5.6 +/- 1.1 mean +/- SEM; p < 0.001). Postfundoplication symptoms were infrequently recorded with no difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: When performing a laparoscopic partial fundoplication, the posterior modification (Toupét) offers advantages in terms of better reflux control compared with an anterior type (Watson).