Endoscopic full-thickness resection and its treatment alternatives in difficult-to-treat lesions of the lower gastrointestinal tract: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) has shown efficacy and safety in the colorectum. The aim of this analysis was to investigate whether EFTR is cost-effective in comparison with surgical and endoscopic treatment alternatives. DESIGN: Real data from the study cohort of the prospective, single-arm WALL RESECT study were used. A simulated comparison arm was created based on a survey that included suggested treatment alternatives to EFTR of the respective lesions. Treatment costs and reimbursement were calculated in euro according to the coding rules of 2017 and 2019 (EFTR). R0 resection rate was used as a measure of effectiveness. To assess cost-effectiveness, the average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were determined. Calculations were made both from the perspective of the care provider as well as of the payer. RESULTS: The cost per case was €2852.20 for the EFTR group, €1712 for the standard endoscopic resection (SER) group, €8895 for the surgical resection group and €5828 for the pooled alternative treatment to EFTR. From the perspective of the care provider, the ACER (mean cost per R0 resection) was €3708.98 for EFTR, €3115.10 for SER, €8924.05 for surgical treatment and €7169.30 for all pooled and weighted alternatives to EFTR. The ICER (additional cost per R0 resection compared with EFTR) was €5196.47 for SER, €26 533.13 for surgical resection and €67 768.62 for the pooled rate of alternatives. Results from the perspective of the payer were similar. CONCLUSION: EFTR is cost-effective in comparison with surgical and endoscopic treatment alternatives in the colorectum.

The Diagnosis and Treatment of Functional Dyspepsia.

BACKGROUND: Functional dyspepsia (FD) is one of the more common functional disorders, with a prevalence of 10-20%. It affectsthe gastrointestinal tract. METHODS: This article is based on publications retrieved by a selective search of PubMed, with special attention to controlled trials, guidelines, and reviews. RESULTS: Typical dyspeptic symptoms in functional dyspepsia include epigastric pain, sensations of pressure and fullness, nausea, and early subjective satiety. The etiology of the disorder is heterogeneous and multifactorial. Contributory causes include motility disturbances, visceral hypersensitivity, elevated mucosal permeability, and disturbances of the autonomic and enteric nervous system. There is as yet no causally directed treatment for functional dyspepsia. Its treatment should begin with intensive patient education regarding the benign nature of the disorder and with the establishment of a therapeutic pact for long-term care. Given the absence of a causally directed treatment, drugs to treat functional dyspepsia should be given for no more than 8-12 weeks. Proton-pump inhibitors, phytotherapeutic drugs, and Helicobacter pylori eradication are evidence-based interventions. For intractable cases, tricyclic antidepressants and psychotherapy are further effective treatment options. CONCLUSION: The impaired quality of life of patients with functional dyspepsia implies the need for definitive establishment of the diagnosis, followed by symptom-oriented treatment for the duration of the symptomatic interval.

The Interdisciplinary Management of Acute Chest Pain.

BACKGROUND: Acute chest pain of non-traumatic origin is a common reason for presentation to physician's offices and emergency rooms. Coronary heart disease is the cause in up to 25% of cases. Because acute chest pain, depending on its etiology, may be associated with a high risk of death, rapid, goal-oriented management is mandatory. METHODS: This review is based on pertinent articles and guidelines retrieved by a selective search in PubMed. RESULTS: History-taking, physical examination, and a 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) are the first steps in the differential diagnostic process and generally allow the identification of features signifying a high risk of lifethreatening illness. If the ECG reveals ST-segment elevation, cardiac catheterization is indicated. The timedependent measurement of highly sensitive troponin values is a reliable test for the diagnosis or exclusion of acute myocardial infarction. A wide variety of other potential causes (e.g., vascular, musculoskeletal, gastroenterologic, or psychosomatic) must be identified from the history if they are to be treated appropriately. Elderly patients need special attention. CONCLUSION: Acute chest pain is a major diagnostic challenge for the physician. Common errors are traceable to non-recognition of important causes and to an inadequate diagnostic work-up. Future studies should be designed to help optimize the interdisciplinary management of patients with chest pain.

[Systemic mastocytosis--definition of an internal disease]. / Die systemische Mastozytose--Standortbestimmung einer internistischen Erkrankung.

Systemic mastocytosis comprises disorders characterized by an accumulation of genetically altered mast cells in all organs and tissues due to an increased proliferation rate and reduced apoptosis of those pathologic mast cells. Release of their mediators can effectively influence organ function and can lead to systemic effects without inducing traces in routinely used laboratory parameters or imaging methods. In most cases, little invasive investigations allow diagnosing the disease and, hence, an appropriate therapy consisting of a basic medication with antihistamine and mast cell membrane-stabilizing compounds that should be supplemented, if required, by a medication adapted to individual symptoms, can be initiated. Because of the probably high prevalence of the disorder, systemic mastocytosis should be considered as a differential diagnosis in particular in the case of chronic gastrointestinal complaints such as abdominal pain/discomfort possibly associated with diarrhea, at an early stage.

Gefitinib in combination with capecitabine as second-line therapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC): a phase I/II study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO).

BACKGROUND: This phase I/II study was conducted to assess the maximal tolerated dose (MTD) and the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of gefitinib in combination with capecitabine in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: After failure of a 1st-line therapy, patients with aCRC received escalating doses of gefitinib once daily in combination with capecitabine twice daily: dose level (DL) 1: gefitinib 250 mg and capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2), DL 2: gefitinib 250 mg and capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2), DL 3: gefitinib 500 mg and capecitabine 850 mg/m(2). DLTs were determined after 6 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: A total of 16 patients were enrolled. On DL1 (n = 6), 1 patient developed a DLT (hand-foot syndrome, HFS n = 1). On DL2 (n = 7), DLTs were observed in 3 patients (exanthema n = 2, HFS n = 1), and on DL3 (n = 3), DLT occurred in 1 patient (HFS n = 1) resulting in recruitment stop at DL3. No patient showed an objective tumor response. Disease stabilization was observed in 6 patients. CONCLUSION: The combination of gefitinib and capecitabine resulted in significant skin toxicities such as exanthema and HFS. As 2nd-line treatment of patients with aCRC, this combination showed no substantial efficacy.

The clinical impact of capsule endoscopy: to believe or not to believe.

The study by Estevez et al., 'Diagnostic yield and clinical outcomes after capsule endoscopy in 100 consecutive patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding' published in this issue of the journal on a large patient cohort refined a subgroup of patients who could best benefit from capsule endoscopy (CE), e.g. patients with overt bleeding and a requirement for transfusion, and a subgroup of patients in whom CE is clearly not indicated, e.g. patients with overt bleeding and no transfusion requirement. Although the results are promising, some further comments on limitations appear appropriate. The entire small intestine was accessible only in a subgroup of patients and there is a necessity for further technical improvement. A large proportion of the significant lesions detected by CE may also have been detected by conventional diagnostic work-up. The clinical relevance of potentially bleeding lesions that were detected by CE is unresolved. For example, the presence of angiodysplasias per se does not imply a significant bleeding source because their natural history, morphological criteria to characterize the bleeding risk, and occurrence in asymptomatic populations are still unknown. Most of the treatment modifications after CE did not reflect a specific impact of CE on changes in treatment modalities (iron supplementation, eradication of Helicobacter pylori, gluten-free diet, suspension of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs). The authors merit credits for their contribution to our understanding on how to put CE into a rational diagnostic algorithm. It seems to be clear that this decision will not be made by the believer or non-believer in CE alone, but also by health insurance companies.