Comparison of cap-assisted endoscopy vs. side-viewing endoscopy for examination of the major duodenal papilla: a randomized, controlled, noninferiority crossover study.

BACKGROUND : Use of a side-viewing endoscope is currently mandatory to examine the major duodenal papilla; however, previous studies have used cap-assisted endoscopy for complete examination of the papilla. The aim of this study was to compare cap-assisted endoscopy with side-viewing endoscopy for examination of the major duodenal papilla. METHODS : This was a prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled, noninferiority crossover study. Patients were randomized to undergo either side-viewing endoscopy followed by cap-assisted endoscopy or cap-assisted endoscopy followed by side-viewing endoscope. Photographs of the major duodenal papilla were digitally edited to mask the cap area before they were evaluated by three blinded external examiners. Our primary end point was complete visualization of the major duodenal papilla. Secondary end points were the ability to examine the mucosal pattern, the overview of the periampullary region, overall satisfaction, and time to locate the papilla. RESULTS : 62 patients completed the study. Complete visualization of the major duodenal papilla was achieved in 60 examinations by side-viewing endoscopy and in 59 by cap-assisted endoscopy (97 % vs. 95 %). The difference between the two examinations was 1.6 % with a two-sided 95 % confidence interval of -4.0 % to 7.3 %, which did not exceed the noninferiority margin of 8 %. Cap-assisted endoscopy achieved better scores regarding the examination of mucosal pattern and overall satisfaction, whereas side-viewing endoscopy had a better overview score (P < 0.001, P = 0.004, and P < 0.001, respectively). There was no relevant difference in the median times to locate the major duodenal papilla. CONCLUSION : Cap-assisted endoscopy and side-viewing endoscopy had similar success rates for complete visualization of the major duodenal papilla. Cap-assisted endoscopy is superior to side-viewing endoscopy regarding the mucosal pattern and overall satisfaction. Side-viewing endoscopy gives a better overview of the periampullary region.

Quality of life of Egyptian donors after living-related liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Quality of life after liver donation must remain a primary outcome measure when we consider the utility of living donor liver transplants. In making clinical decisions on the use of transplantation for chronic liver diseases, consideration should be given to the key factors likely to affect subsequent health related quality of life. It would be beneficial for donors, if factors predicting good quality of life are identified. The aim of this study was to assess the health related quality of life changes experienced by donors following living related liver transplantation using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between August 2001 and December 2006, 125 adults received liver grafts from living donors at Dar Al-Fouad Hospital, Cairo, Egypt. The SF-36v2 questionnaire was applied to 30 donors after at least 6 months following donation and maximally 4 years after donation (mean±STD:3.28±1.56 years). Furthermore, 30 healthy volunteers were taken as a control group. RESULTS: None of the donors required re-surgery and no deaths were reported. Only 4 (13.3%) donors experienced minor complications, which did not affect their quality of life and had no long term effects. No significant difference was found between donors and control group when means of the Physical and Mental Component Summary were compared. The physical functioning domain was the only domain of health which showed a statistically significant difference between both groups. CONCLUSION: Health related quality of life of donors was not compromised after full recovery. All donors had good recovery and returned to regular activities within 2-4 months post donation.