A pilot study evaluating a new low-volume colon cleansing procedure for capsule colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) offers an alternative approach for endoscopic visualization of the colon. Some of the current CCE bowel cleansing regimens use sodium phosphate, which has raised safety concerns. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to test the feasibility and efficacy of a new low-volume, sodium phosphate-free polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparation. METHODS: The first 26 patients (original cleansing procedure) received a colon cleansing regimen of PEG plus ascorbic acid: patients drank 1 L in the evening and 0.75 L in the morning before capsule ingestion. Patients also drank an additional 0.5 L PEG boost and an optional 0.25 L PEG boost during the capsule procedure. Following an interim analysis, the cleansing procedure of the subsequent 24 patients was modified, with the morning intake before capsule ingestion being increased to 1 L, as well as the second boost (0.25 L) being administered 1 - 2 hours earlier (modified cleansing procedure). RESULTS: The overall colon cleanliness was considered to be good or excellent in 83 % (original cleansing procedure) and 82 % (modified cleansing procedure) of patients, without any significant difference between regimens (P > 0.05). In 37 /49 (76 %) of the CCE procedures, the hemorrhoidal plexus was identified and thus the examination was considered complete, with no significant differences between the two CCE cleansing procedures. The capsule sensitivity and specificity for detecting colonic polyps ≥ 6 mm were 91 % (95 %CI 70 % - 98 %) and 94 % (95 %CI 87 % - 97 %), respectively, compared with standard optical colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: A colon cleansing procedure using PEG + ascorbic acid for capsule colonoscopy yielded an adequate cleansing level in > 80 % of patients, a completion rate of 76 %, and good accuracy for detecting polyps. This procedure may be considered as an alternative, particularly for patients in whom sodium phosphate-based preparations are contraindicated.

Prospective comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and surgical histology in upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors.

STUDY AIM: To assess the accuracy of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy in the differential diagnosis of gastrointestinal stroma cell tumors (GIST) from other submucosal tumors, using both cytology and histology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective study from May 2005 to September 2008 in all patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors. Only patients in whom surgical resection was carried out were included in the final analysis. In cases of mesenchymal tumor, immunocytochemistry was attempted for further differentiation between GIST and non-GIST. Surgical histopathology served as the gold standard. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were analyzable, with a final histologic diagnosis of 35 mesenchymal tumors. Sufficient tissue for conventional cytologic diagnosis was obtained only in the 35 patients with mesenchymal tumors; in this subgroup, immunocytochemistry was possible in 46 %. If and only if enough material was available for immunocytochemistry, the sensitivity for (correct recognition of) GIST tumors was 93 %. In all 12 patients with nonmesenchymal tumors and lesions, cytology was nondiagnostic and the diagnosis had to be based on clinical suspicion and the appearance on endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). On an intention-to-diagnose basis, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) had a positive predictive value for mesenchymal tumors of 100 %, but no value for the diagnosis of other lesions; using immunocytochemistry, a GIST tumor was recognized among the mesenchymal tumors with a sensitivity of 58 % and a specificity of 8 %. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNA-based cytology is safe and has only limited value for the differential diagnosis of submucosal tumors, mainly because insufficient material is harvested. Better tissue acquisition techniques are necessary for better differential diagnosis.

A prospective, randomized multicenter trial comparing DoubleLayer and polyethylene stents for malignant distal common bile duct strictures.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Endoscopic biliary stenting is an established treatment for malignant obstructive jaundice. Stent clogging continues to be a major problem with plastic stents. The aim of this study was to carry out a prospective comparison of two stents with different materials and shapes: the Olympus DoubleLayer stent (DLS; perfluoro alkoxy, without sideholes) and the standard polyethylene (PE) stent (with sideholes). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 120 patients (70 women; mean age 71, range 36 - 91) with jaundice due to malignant strictures of the middle to distal third of the common bile duct were randomly assigned to receive either DLS (n = 60) or PE (n = 60) biliary stents. Patients with cholangitis, hemobilia, previous biliary drainage, hilar stricture, or ampullary cancer were excluded. RESULTS: In all, 28 DLS patients (47 %) and 17 PE stent patients (29 %) died without clinical evidence of stent occlusion after a mean of 114 and 105 days, respectively ( P < 0.05). Twenty-six DLS patients (43 %) and 38 PE stent patients (63 %) had symptoms of stent clogging after a mean of 144 and 99 days, respectively ( P < 0.05). Stent dysfunction (stent orifice impacted on the bile duct or duodenal wall, stent migration) was recorded in six DLS patients (10 %) and five PE patients (8 %) (n. s.). Kaplan-Meier analysis of DLS and PE stent clogging-free survival showed a significantly longer patency period with the DLS stents (P = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: These results show that DoubleLayer stents have a longer patency period than PE stents. Patients who received PE stents had a higher risk of stent occlusion (relative risk 3.05; 95 % CI, 1.57 - 5.89) before death than DLS patients.