Continuous use of antithrombotic medications during peri-endoscopic submucosal dissection period for colorectal lesions: A propensity score matched study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The aim of this study was to elucidate the continuous use of antithrombotic medications during the peri-colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) period. METHODS: This study included 468 patients with colorectal epithelial neoplasms treated by ESD, consisting of 82 under antithrombotic medications and 386 patients without the medications. Among patients taking antithrombotic medications, antithrombotic agents were continued during the peri-ESD period. Clinical characteristics and adverse events were compared after propensity score matching. RESULTS: Before and after propensity score matching, post-colorectal ESD bleeding rate was higher in patients continuing antithrombotic medications (19.5% and 21.6%, respectively) than in those not taking antithrombotic medications (2.9% and 5.4%, respectively). In the Cox regression analysis, continuation of antithrombotic medications was associated with post-ESD bleeding risk (hazard ratio, 3.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-11.6; P < 0.05) compared with patients without antithrombotic therapy. All patients who experienced post-ESD bleeding were successfully treated by endoscopic hemostasis procedure or conservative therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Continuation of antithrombotic medications during the peri-colorectal ESD period increases the risk of bleeding. However, the continuation may be acceptable under careful monitoring for post-ESD bleeding.

Successful endoscopic sclerotherapy with bile duct stenting for a vascular malformation neighboring the duodenal papilla in blue rubber bleb nevus syndrome.

A 14-year-old girl, who had been diagnosed with blue rubber bleb nevus syndrome, was referred to our hospital because of iron deficiency anemia. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy revealed a dark and red-colored vascular malformation occurring just above the duodenal papilla. Because the lesion was regarded as the cause of the anemia, we performed polidocanol injection therapy with bile duct stenting. Since esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed a month later revealed a scarred ulcer, the bile duct stent was removed. She has been under observation as an outpatient without any symptoms.

Resectability of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for duodenal tumor: A single-center, retrospective pilot study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (U-EMR) has been attracting much attention as treatment for patients with nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (NADETs). We aim to compare treatment outcomes, including submucosal resectability, between patients undergoing U-EMR and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (C-EMR) for NADET. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 38 patients with NADET treated by U-EMR or C-EMR. In the resected specimens, we measured the horizontal length, the vertical distance from the muscularis mucosa to the margin at the deepest site, and the overall submucosal area. The submucosal index (SMI) was defined as the overall submucosal area divided by the largest horizontal length. These values and other treatment outcomes were compared between NADETs resected by U-EMR and C-EMR. RESULTS: The median size of lesions was 7 mm with a range of 3-13 mm. Although the incidence of adverse events and the rates of en bloc and R0 resection were not different in the two groups, the median procedure time was significantly shorter in the U-EMR group (11 min vs 13 min; P = 0.045). The median submucosal depth at the deepest site (1.22 mm vs 1.08 mm; P = 0.38) and the median SMI (0.44 vs 0.41; P = 0.42) were not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The resectability between NADETs treated by U-EMR and C-EMR was comparable. These results, together with the shorter procedure time required for U-EMR, suggest that U-EMR may have the potential to be the first choice for small to medium-sized NADET.

Is barium enema examination negligible for the management of colorectal cancer? Comparison with conventional colonoscopy and magnifying colonoscopy.

PURPOSE: The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the clinical value of barium enema (BE) examination for the management of colorectal epithelial neoplasms. METHODS: We reviewed the colonoscopy records at our institution from 2014 to 2019 and identified cases of endoscopically or surgically resected colorectal epithelial neoplasms evaluated by BE, conventional colonoscopy, magnifying narrow-band imaging colonoscopy (M-NBI), and magnifying chromoendoscopy (MCE). The yield of each modality for the diagnosis of massively submucosal invasive (mSM) colorectal cancer was evaluated by a receiver-operating characteristic analysis including the area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: We analyzed the records of 105 patients (17 adenomas, 53 high-grade dysplasias (HGDs), and 35 cancers). Smooth surface, irregularity in depression, and eccentric deformity on the profile view with BE were observed more frequently in mSM cancers than adenomas/HGDs/slightly submucosal invasive cancers (p < 0.01). The AUC of BE was 0.8355, the value of which was not different from the other three modalities (conventional colonoscopy 0.7678; M-NBI 0.7835; MCE 0.8376). Although the specificity, PPV, and accuracy of BE were lower than those of M-NBI and MCE, the sensitivity and NPV of BE were the highest among the four types of examinations. CONCLUSION: BE is still available and may serve as a supplementary modality for the diagnosis of mSM cancers.

Eosinophilic esophagitis with a severe stenosis: report of a Japanese case.

A 49 years old male, who had had postprandial dysphagia during the preceding 10 years, was referred to our hospital. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) revealed longitudinal furrows and concentric rings in the mid to lower esophagus and stenosis in the lower esophagus. Histologic findings from esophageal biopsies showed eosinophilic infiltration (> 15 per high-power field). Under a diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis, an endoscopic bougie was performed, which resulted in symptomatic relief. Follow-up EGD revealed that the stenosis had improved, but histologic findings of eosinophilic esophagitis were remaining. Our case suggests that although rare, esophageal stenosis occurs in Japanese patients with EoE, and that the complication may be a consequence of prolonged disease. Other risks and the appropriate treatment for the prevention of stenosis need to be elucidated further.