Intermediate-risk patients with three to four small adenomas should be considered low risk for colorectal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Intermediate-risk patients following a colorectal cancer screening program may have differential risk of advanced lesions depending on the findings of an index colonoscopy. The aim of the present study was to comparatively assess advanced colorectal neoplasia risk at the first follow-up colonoscopy among the different intermediate-risk subgroups with a focus on patients with three to four adenomas. METHODS: All patients recruited for a baseline screening colonoscopy between 2006 and 2011 were included. Number, size and histopathological characteristics of adenomas were collected. Main outcome was an advanced colorectal neoplasia detection rate (invasive carcinoma or advanced adenoma) at the first follow-up colonoscopy. Low- and high-risk patients were excluded. RESULTS: Five hundred and sixty-one intermediate-risk patients (63.3% men, mean age: 59.01 ± 6.16 years) underwent indexing and follow-up colonoscopy. By multivariate analysis, three to four adenomas (OR: 3.613 [95% CI: 1.661-7.859], P = 0.001) and adenoma size ≥10 <20 mm (OR: 3.374 [95% CI: 1.618-7.034], P = 0.001) were independent factors associated with advanced colorectal neoplasia. Advanced lesions were detected in 7.66% of cases. Of patients with advanced colorectal neoplasia, 51.16% belonged to the three-to-four-adenoma group and ≥1 of ≥10 <20-mm subgroups (n = 132, 23.53%). These patients demonstrated a higher rate of advanced lesions [OR: 3.886 (95% CI: 2.061-7.325), P < 0.001] than patients with three to four small adenomas of <10 mm (16.67% vs 5.07%, P < 0.001). The association between patients with small adenomas (n = 217, 38.68%) and advanced lesions was not significant (OR: 0.521 [95% CI: 0257-1.056], P = 0.066). CONCLUSION: Intermediate-risk patients with three to four small adenomas achieved a very low advanced lesion rate at follow up. Surveillance interval should be lengthened because these patients should be considered low risk.

Concordancia diagnóstica entre la cápsula endoscópica y enteroscopia de doble balón en la hemorragia digestiva media en un centro de referencia / Diagnosis agreement between capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding at a referral center

INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVO: la capsula endoscópica y la enteroscopia de doble balón son técnicas de reconocido valor en el estudio de la hemorragia digestiva media, habiendo numerosos factores que pueden afectar a su rendimiento diagnóstico. El objetivo del presente estudio es el de caracterizar y definir los niveles de concordancia entre ambas focalizando en el tipo de lesión, en una gran cohorte de pacientes de un centro de referencia. MATERIAL Y MÉTODO: entre los años 2004-2014 se administraron 1.209 cápsulas en 1.078 pacientes y se realizaron 381 enteroscopias en 361 pacientes con hemorragia digestiva media. RESULTADOS: en 332 pacientes (edad media: 65,22 ± 15,41, 183 hombres) se realizaron ambos procedimientos. Ambas técnicas tuvieron un rendimiento diagnóstico similar (70,5% vs. 69,6%, p = 0,9). El rendimiento diagnóstico global de la enteroscopia fue superior en pacientes con una cápsula previa positiva (79,3% vs. 27,9%, p < 0,001). La concordancia diagnóstica entre los resultados por cápsula y enteroscopia para cada lesión fue muy buena para pólipos (0,89 [95% IC: 0,78-0,99]), buena en las lesiones vasculares (0,66 [95% IC: 0,55-0,77]), tumores (0,66 [95% IC: 0,55-0,76]) y moderada para úlceras (0.56 [95% IC: 0,46-0,67]). Los divertículos (0,39 [95% IC: 0,29-0,5] tuvieron una concordancia razonable. Los resultados entre ambos procedimientos difirieron en 73 pacientes (22%). CONCLUSIONES: el presente estudio evidencia que aunque el rendimiento de la cápsula endoscópica y la enteroscopia de doble balón de forma global sean similares, hay numerosos factores que pueden modificar estos valores, siendo el principal el tipo de lesión

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Capsule endoscopy and doubleballoon enteroscopy are well-recognized procedures in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, with many factors that may influence their diagnosis yield. The aim of the present study was to characterize the degree of agreement between both techniques with focus on the type of lesion in a large cohort of patients at a referral center. MATERIAL AND METHOD: One thousand two hundred and nine capsules were administered in 1,078 patients and 381 enteroscopies were performed in 361 patients with obscure-gastrointestinal bleeding from 2004 to 2014. RESULTS: Both procedures were carried out in 332 patients (mean age: 65.22 ± 15.41, 183 men) and they have a similar diagnosis yield (70.5% vs. 69.6%, p = 0.9). Overall enteroscopy diagnosis yield was higher within patients with a previous positive capsule endoscopy (79.3% vs. 27.9%, p < 0.001). The degree of agreement was very good for polyps (0.89 [95% CI: 0.78-0.99]), good for vascular lesions (0.66 [95% CI: 0.55-0.77]) and tumors (0.66 [95% CI: 0.55-0.76]) and moderate for ulcers (0.56 [95% CI: 0.46-0.67]). Diverticula (0.39 [95% CI: 0.29-0.5]) achieved a fair agreement. The results of CE and DBE differed in 73 patients (22%). CONCLUSIONS: The present study confirms that although overall diagnostic yield by capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy is similar, there are many factors which can modify these values, mainly the type of lesion

Invaginación intestinal como presentación atípica de enfermedad celiaca / Intestinal intussusception as an atypical presentation of celiac disease

No disponible

Varices estomales: una causa infrecuente de sangrado en pacientes con hipertensión portal / Stomal varices: an unusual cause of bleeding in patients with portal hypertension

No disponible

[Diagnosis agreement between capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding at a referral center]. / Concordancia diagnóstica entre la cápsula endoscópica y enteroscopia de doblebalón en la hemorragia digestiva media en un centro de referencia.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Capsule endoscopy and double balloon enteroscopy are well-recognized procedures in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, with many factors that may influence their diagnosis yield. The aim of the present study was to characterize the degree of agreement between both techniques with focus on the type of lesion in a large cohort of patients at a referral center. MATERIAL AND METHOD: One thousand two hundred and nine capsules were administered in 1,078 patients and 381 enteroscopies were performed in 361 patients with obscure-gastrointestinal bleeding from 2004 to 2014. RESULTS: Both procedures were carried out in 332 patients (mean age: 65.22 +/- 15.41, 183 men) and they have a similar diagnosis yield (70.5% vs. 69.6%, p = 0.9). Overall enteroscopy diagnosis yield was higher within patients with a previous positive capsule endoscopy (79.3% vs. 27.9%, p < 0.001). The degree of agreement was very good for polyps (0.89 [95% CI: 0.78-0.99]), good for vascular lesions (0.66 [95% CI: 0.55-0.77]) and tumors(0.66 [95% CI: 0.55-0.76]) and moderate for ulcers (0.56 [95% CI: 0.46-0.67]). Diverticula (0.39 [95% CI: 0.29-0.5]) achieved a fair agreement. The results of CE and DBE differed in 73 patients (22%). CONCLUSIONS: The present study confirms that although overall diagnostic yield by capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy is similar, there are many factors which can modify these values, mainly the type of lesion.

Pólipo fibroso inflamatorio (de Vaneck) como origen de hemorragia digestiva de origen oscuro / Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding due to an inflammatory fibroid polyp (of Vaneck)

No disponible

Emergency double-balloon enteroscopy combined with real-time viewing of capsule endoscopy: a feasible combined approach in acute overt-obscure gastrointestinal bleeding?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There are few data concerning emergency double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and its usefulness in the management of severe acute obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate emergency DBE and capsule endoscopy (CE) in patients with overt OGIB, analyzing the feasibility of this combined approach. METHODS: Emergency DBE in patients with overt OGIB was defined as performance within 24 h of symptom onset. We reported 27 patients (16 men, mean age: 64.6 ± 17.9 years) with overt severe bleeding who underwent 29 emergency DBE (22 anterograde, 7 retrograde). Of 27 patients, 16 (59.3%) underwent CE with real time (RT) viewing. RESULTS: Patients were diagnosed with the following: Dieulafoy's lesion (DL; n = 11, 40.7%), angioectasia (n = 7, 25.9%), tumors (n = 4, 14.8%), diverticulum (n = 3, 11.1%), ulcers (n = 2, 7.4%). We diagnosed 23 lesions amenable to endoscopic hemostasis and successfully treated 21 of them (77.8%). DL detection rate was statistically higher in the emergency DBE group than in OGIB patients with DBE done 24 h after symptom onset (40.7% vs 0.9%, respectively, P < 0.001). Combined approach with RT viewing by CE correctly modified DBE management in four patients (25%). CONCLUSIONS: Emergency DBE is feasible, safe and effective in acute OGIB and may avoid major surgery, diagnosing and successfully treating most patients. Combined approach with RT viewing by CE is especially useful to identify recurrent bleeding vascular lesions such as DL that may be easily misdiagnosed by non-emergency DBE.

Colitis izquierda necrótica por enema de agua caliente / Necrotic left colitis due to hot water enema

No disponible

Schwannoma pericárdico. La ecoendoscopia como herramienta de apoyo en el estudio de lesiones cardiacas / Pericardial schwannoma. Echoendoscopy as an aid in the study of cardiac lesions

No disponible