Clinical, Radiological, and Endoscopic Ultrasound Findings in Groove Pancreatitis: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Groove pancreatitis is a rare form of focal pancreatitis that affects the groove area. Since groove pancreatitis may be mistaken for malignancy, it should be considered in patients with pancreatic head mass lesions or duodenal stenosis to avoid unnecessary surgical procedures. The aim of the study was to document the clinical, radiologic, endoscopic characteristics, and treatment outcomes of patients with groove pancreatitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective multicenter observational study included all patients diagnosed with one or more imaging criteria suggestive of groove pancreatitis in the participating centers. Patients with proven malignant fine-needle aspiration/biopsy results were excluded. All patients were followed in their own centers and were retrospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Out of the initially included 30 patients with imaging criteria suggestive of groove pancreatitis, 9 patients (30%) were excluded because of malignant endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration or biopsy results. The mean age of the included 21 patients was 49 ± 10.6 years, with a male predominance of 71%. There was a history of smoking in 66.7% and alcohol consumption in 76.2% of patients. The main endoscopic finding was gastric outlet obstruction observed in 16 patients (76%). There was duodenal wall thickening in 9 (42.8%), 5 (23.8%), and 16 (76.2%) patients on computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and endoscopic ultrasound, respectively. Moreover, pancreatic head enlargement/mass was observed in 10 (47.6%), 8 (38%), and 12 (57%) patients, and duodenal wall cysts in 5 (23.8%), 1 (4.8%), and 11 (52.4%) patients, respectively. Conservative and endoscopic treatment has achieved favorable outcomes in more than 90% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Groove pancreatitis should be considered in any case with duodenal stenosis, duodenal wall cysts, or thickening of the groove area. Various imaging modalities, including computerized tomography, endoscopic ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging, have a valuable role in characterizing groove pancreatitis. However, endoscopic fine-needle aspiration or biopsy should be considered in all cases to diagnose groove pancreatitis and exclude malignancy, which can have similar findings.

Practical approach to linear endoscopic ultrasound examination of the rectum and anal canal.

Standard endosonographic examination of the rectal area is usually performed with radial endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). However, in recent years, widespread availability of linear EUS for assessing various anatomical regions in the gastrointestinal tract has facilitated its use in the assessment of anorectal disorders. Currently, many rectal and anal diseases, including perianal abscesses, fistulae, polyps, and neoplastic lesions, can be well-visualized and evaluated with linear EUS. The aim of this review is to shed light on the anatomy and systematic examination of the anorectal region with linear EUS and clinical implications for different anorectal pathologies.

The validity evaluation of different 16srRNA gene primers for helicobacter detection urgently requesting to design new specific primers.

Molecular diagnosis of helicobacters by PCR is simpler, more accurate, and feasible compared to other diagnostic methods. Validity and accuracy are highly dependent on the PCR primer design, diffusion time, and mutation rate of helicobacters. This study aimed to design 16srRNA -specific primers for Helicobacter spp. and H. pylori. Application of comparative statistical analysis of the diagnostic utility of the most available 16srRNA genus-specific primers. The new primers were designed using bioinformatics tools (MAFFT MSA and Gblocks command line). A comparative study was applied on nine genus-specific 16srRNA primers in comparison to the ConsH using in silico and laboratory evaluation. The results demonstrated that the best specificity and sensitivity of the primers designed for this study compared to other primers. The comparative study revealed that the heminested outer/inner primers were the worst. Although H276, 16srRNA(a), HeliS/Heli-nest, and Hcom had acceptable diagnostic utility, false positive and false negative results were obtained. Specificity testing on clinical samples indicated a surprising result; that H. pylori was not the sole enemy that we were looking for, but the Non-Helicobacter pylori Helicobacters should be considered as a real risk prognostic for gastric diseases, consequently, a specific diagnosis and treatment should be developed. This study concluded that our designed primers were the most specific and sensitive in comparison with other primers. In addition, in silico evaluation is not accurate enough for primer assessment and that the laboratory evaluation is mandatory.