A study of the clinical utility of a 20-minute secretin-stimulated endoscopic pancreas function test and performance according to clinical variables.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Direct pancreas juice testing of bicarbonate, lipase, or trypsin after stimulation by secretin or cholecystokinin is used to determine exocrine function, a surrogate for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis (CP). Endoscopic pancreas function tests (ePFTs), where a peak bicarbonate concentration (PBC) ≥80 mEq/L in pancreas juice is considered normal, are now used more frequently. In this ePFT, aspirates start 35 minutes after secretin administration because pancreas output peaks 30 minutes after secretagogue administration. The performance of ePFT in a cohort of patients with a presumptive diagnosis of CP referred to a pancreas clinic for consideration of an intervention including total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplantation was studied, compared with EUS, ERCP, histology, and consensus diagnosis. The effect of sedation, narcotic use, aspirate volume, body mass index, age, and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on test performance is reported. METHODS: After a test dose, synthetic human secretin was administered intravenously, and 30 minutes later sedation was achieved with midazolam and fentanyl or propofol. A gastroscope was advanced to the major papilla where 4 continuous aspiration samples were performed at 5-minute intervals in sealed bottles. PBC ≥80 mEq/L was normal. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients had ePFTs from August 2010 through October 2015. Twenty-seven patients (33%) were diagnosed with CP. Eighteen of the 27 patients with CP and 1 of the 54 patients without CP had an abnormal ePFT, producing a sensitivity of 66% (95% CI, 46.0-83.5), specificity 98% (95% CI, 90.1-99.9), positive predictive value 94.7% (95% CI, 74-99.9), and negative predictive value 85.5% (95% CI, 74.2-93.1). ERCP and PBC concordance was generally poor, but none of the patients without CP had major EUS changes, and only 3 patients with a PBC <80 mEq/L had a normal EUS. The PBC was affected by narcotics and PPI use. CONCLUSION: A 20-minute ePFT after secretin administration had a marginal sensitivity for diagnosis of CP. The diagnosis of CP should not rely on a single study and certainly not a PFT. The duodenal aspirate volume did not correlate with the PBC, which contrasts with current secretin-enhanced MRCP knowledge; therefore, further studies on this subject are warranted. Neither type of sedation, BMI, nor age affected test performance. Narcotics and PPIs may affect the PBC, so borderline results should be interpreted with caution in these groups.

Superior sagittal sinus thrombosis as the initial presentation of renal cell carcinoma.

We describe a 68-year-old man who presented with headaches, nausea, and dizziness and was found to have a superior sagittal sinus venous thrombosis on magnetic resonance imaging. His initial hypercoagulable workup was negative. Computed tomography of the abdomen revealed a large mass originating from the kidney. A radical nephrectomy was performed at an outside hospital, and histological study of the excised mass disclosed clear cell renal carcinoma.

Endoscopic suturing for transoral outlet reduction increases weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Weight regain or insufficient loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is common. This is partially attributable to dilatation of the gastrojejunostomy (GJ), which diminishes the restrictive capacity of RYGB. Endoluminal interventions for GJ reduction are being explored as alternatives to revision surgery. We performed a randomized, blinded, sham-controlled trial to evaluate weight loss after sutured transoral outlet reduction (TORe). METHODS: Patients with weight regain or inadequate loss after RYGB and GJ diameter greater than 2 cm were assigned randomly to groups that underwent TORe (n = 50) or a sham procedure (controls, n = 27). Intraoperative performance, safety, weight loss, and clinical outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Subjects who received TORe had a significantly greater mean percentage weight loss from baseline (3.5%; 95% confidence interval, 1.8%-5.3%) than controls (0.4%; 95% confidence interval, 2.3% weight gain to 3.0% weight loss) (P = .021), using a last observation carried forward intent-to-treat analysis. As-treated analysis also showed greater mean percentage weight loss in the TORe group than controls (3.9% and 0.2%, respectively; P = .014). Weight loss or stabilization was achieved in 96% subjects receiving TORe and 78% of controls (P = .019). The TORe group had reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure (P < .001) and a trend toward improved metabolic indices. In addition, 85% of the TORe group reported compliance with the healthy lifestyle eating program, compared with 53.8% of controls; 83% of TORe subjects said they would undergo the procedure again, and 78% said they would recommend the procedure to a friend. The groups had similar frequencies of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: A multicenter randomized trial provides Level I evidence that TORe reduces weight regain after RYGB. These results were achieved using a superficial suction-based device; greater levels of weight loss could be achieved with newer, full-thickness suturing devices. TORe is one approach to avoid weight regain; a longitudinal multidisciplinary approach with dietary counseling and behavioral changes are required for long-term results. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00394212.

Retrograde-viewing device improves adenoma detection rate in colonoscopies for surveillance and diagnostic workup.

AIM: To determine which patients might benefit most from retrograde viewing during colonoscopy through subset analysis of randomized, controlled trial data. METHODS: The Third Eye® Retroscope® Randomized Clinical Evaluation (TERRACE) was a randomized, controlled, multicenter trial designed to evaluate the efficacy of a retrograde-viewing auxiliary imaging device that is used during colonoscopy to provide a second video image which allows viewing of areas on the proximal aspect of haustral folds and flexures that are difficult to see with the colonoscope's forward view. We performed a post-hoc analysis of the TERRACE data to determine whether certain subsets of the patient population would gain more benefit than others from use of the device. Subjects were patients scheduled for colonoscopy for screening, surveillance or diagnostic workup, and each underwent same-day tandem examinations with standard colonoscopy (SC) and Third Eye colonoscopy (TEC), randomized to SC followed by TEC or vice versa. RESULTS: Indication for colonoscopy was screening in 176/345 subjects (51.0%), surveillance after previous polypectomy in 87 (25.2%) and diagnostic workup in 82 (23.8%). In 4 subjects no indication was specified. Previously reported overall results had shown a net additional adenoma detection rate (ADR) with TEC of 23.2% compared to SC. Relative risk (RR) of missing adenomas with SC vs TEC as the initial procedure was 1.92 (P = 0.029). Post-hoc subset analysis shows additional ADRs for TEC compared to SC were 4.4% for screening, 35.7% for surveillance, 55.4% for diagnostic and 40.7% for surveillance and diagnostic combined. The RR of missing adenomas with SC vs TEC was 1.11 (P = 0.815) for screening, 3.15 (P = 0.014) for surveillance, 8.64 (P = 0.039) for diagnostic and 3.34 (P = 0.003) for surveillance and diagnostic combined. Although a multivariate Poisson regression suggested gender as a possibly significant factor, subset analysis showed that the difference between genders was not statistically significant. Age, bowel prep quality and withdrawal time did not significantly affect the RR of missing adenomas with SC vs TEC. Mean sizes of adenomas detected with TEC and SC were similar at 0.59 cm and 0.56 cm, respectively (P = NS). CONCLUSION: TEC allows detection of significantly more adenomas compared to SC in patients undergoing surveillance or diagnostic workup, but not in screening patients (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01044732).

Treating Clostridium difficile infection with fecal microbiota transplantation.

Clostridium difficile infection is increasing in incidence, severity, and mortality. Treatment options are limited and appear to be losing efficacy. Recurrent disease is especially challenging; extended treatment with oral vancomycin is becoming increasingly common but is expensive. Fecal microbiota transplantation is safe, inexpensive, and effective; according to case and small series reports, about 90% of patients are cured. We discuss the rationale, methods, and use of fecal microbiota transplantation.

Effect of a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: the TERRACE study.

BACKGROUND: Although colonoscopy is currently the optimal method for detecting colorectal polyps, some are missed. The Third Eye Retroscope provides an additional retrograde view that may detect polyps behind folds. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the addition of the Third Eye Retroscope to colonoscopy improves the adenoma detection rate. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Nine European and U.S. centers. PATIENTS: Of 448 enrolled subjects, 395 had data for 2 procedures. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects underwent same-day tandem examinations with standard colonoscopy (SC) and Third Eye colonoscopy (TEC). Subjects were randomized to SC followed by TEC or TEC followed by SC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Detection rates for all polyps and adenomas with each method. RESULTS: In the per-protocol population, 173 subjects underwent SC and then TEC, and TEC yielded 78 additional polyps (48.8%), including 49 adenomas (45.8%). In 176 subjects undergoing TEC and then SC, SC yielded 31 additional polyps (19.0%), including 26 adenomas (22.6%). Net additional detection rates with TEC were 29.8% for polyps and 23.2% for adenomas. The relative risk of missing with SC compared with TEC was 2.56 for polyps (P < .001) and 1.92 for adenomas (P = .029). Mean withdrawal times for SC and TEC were 7.58 and 9.52 minutes, respectively (P < .001). The median difference in withdrawal times was 1 minute (P < .001). The mean total procedure times for SC and TEC were 16.97 and 20.87 minutes, respectively (P < .001). LIMITATIONS: Despite randomization and a large cohort, there was disparity in polyp prevalence between the 2 groups of subjects. CONCLUSION: The Third Eye Retroscope increases adenoma detection rate by visualizing areas behind folds. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01044732.).

Impact of experience with a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rates and withdrawal times during colonoscopy: the Third Eye Retroscope study group.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy has been adopted as the preferred method to screen for colorectal neoplasia in the United States. However, lesions can be missed because of numerous factors, including location on the proximal aspect of folds or flexures, where they may be difficult to detect with the forward-viewing colonoscope. The Third Eye Retroscope (TER) is a disposable device that is passed through the instrument channel of a standard colonoscope to provide a retrograde view that complements the forward view of the colonoscope during withdrawal. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether experience with the TER affects polyp detection rates and procedure times in experienced endoscopists who had not previously used the equipment. DESIGN, SETTING, PATIENTS: This was an open-label, prospective, multicenter study at 9 U.S. sites, involving 298 patients presenting for colonoscopy, evaluating the use of the TER in combination with a standard colonoscope. INTERVENTIONS: After cecal intubation, the TER was inserted through the instrument channel of the colonoscope. During withdrawal, the forward and retrograde video images were observed simultaneously on a wide-screen monitor. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome measures were the number and size of adenomas and all polyps detected with the standard colonoscope and with the colonoscope combined with the TER. Secondary outcome measures were withdrawal phase time and total procedure time. Each endoscopist examined 20 subjects, divided into quartiles according to the order of their procedures, and results were compared among quartiles. RESULTS: Overall, 182 polyps were detected with the colonoscope and 27 additional polyps with the TER, a 14.8% increase (P < .001). A total of 100 adenomas were detected with the colonoscope and 16 more with the TER, a 16.0% increase (P < .001). For procedures performed after each endoscopist had completed 15 procedures while using the TER, the mean additional detection rates with the TER were 17.0% for all polyps (P < .001) and 25.0% for adenomas (P < .001). For lesions 6 mm or larger, the overall additional detection rates with the TER for all polyps and for adenomas were 23.2% and 24.3%, respectively. For lesions 10 mm or larger, the overall additional detection rates with the TER for all polyps and for adenomas were 22.6% and 19.0%, respectively. The mean withdrawal times in the first and fourth quartiles were 10.6 and 9.2 minutes, respectively (P = .044). LIMITATIONS: There was no randomization or separate control group. The endoscopists judged whether each lesion could have been detected with the colonscope alone by using their standard technique. CONCLUSIONS: Polyp detection rates improved significantly with the TER, especially after 15 procedures, when the mean additional detection rate for adenomas was 25.0%. Additional detection rates with the TER for medium-size and large adenomas were greater than for smaller lesions. These results suggest that, compared with a colonoscope alone, a retrograde-viewing device can increase detection rates for clinically significant adenomas without detriment to procedure time or procedure complications. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00969124.).