Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 81
Filtrar
1.
PLoS One ; 15(1): e0226681, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31971937

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Splenic artery aneurysm (SAA) is a rare but potentially fatal condition. Rupture results in 25% mortality up to 75% in pregnant women with 95% fetal mortality. Brief reports suggest an increased risk of developing SAA in patients with HHT. METHODS: We analyzed enhanced multidetector CT data in 186 HHT patients matched (gender and ± 5 year old) with 186 controls. We screened for SAA and recorded diameter of splenic and hepatic arteries and hepatic, pancreatic and splenic parenchymal involvements. We determined by univariate and multivariate analysis, the relationship with age, sex, genetic status, cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) and visceral involvement. RESULTS: SAA concerned 24.7% of HHT patients and 5.4% of controls, p<0.001. Factors associated with increased risk of SAA in HHT were female gender (p = 0.04, OR = 2.12, IC 95% = 1.03-4.50), age (p = 0.0003, OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.02-1.06) and pancreatic parenchymal involvement (p = 0.04, OR = 2.13, 95% CI = 1.01-4.49), but not type of mutation, hepatic or splenic parenchymal involvements, splenic size or splenic artery diameter or CVRF. CONCLUSIONS: We found a 4.57 higher rate of SAA in HHT patients without evidence of splenic high output related disease or increased CVRF. These results suggest the presence of a vascular intrinsic involvement. It should lead to screening all HHT patients for SAA. The vasculopathy hypothesis could require a change in management as screening of all systemic arteries and even the aorta and to further research in the field.


Asunto(s)
Aneurisma/epidemiología , Arteria Esplénica/patología , Telangiectasia Hemorrágica Hereditaria/complicaciones , Enfermedades Vasculares/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Aneurisma/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma/etiología , Aneurisma/patología , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Francia/epidemiología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tomografía Computarizada Multidetector , Prevalencia , Pronóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Enfermedades Vasculares/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedades Vasculares/etiología , Enfermedades Vasculares/patología
2.
Endosc Int Open ; 4(5): E583-4, 2016 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27227119

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Routine biopsy of the upper gastrointestinal tract is performed with increasing frequency. It is generally considered to be safe without significant complication. However, gastrointestinal bleeding as a result of cold biopsy is a known complication. We report seven cases of upper gastrointestinal bleeding after cold biopsy and discuss clinical data, risks factors, severity and management of this event. We suggest that physicians must be more cautious with this rare but potentially severe complication.

3.
Endoscopy ; 48(5): 489-96, 2016 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26862844

RESUMEN

This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). It addresses the removal of foreign bodies in the upper gastrointestinal tract in adults. Recommendations Nonendoscopic measures 1 ESGE recommends diagnostic evaluation based on the patient's history and symptoms. ESGE recommends a physical examination focused on the patient's general condition and to assess signs of any complications (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 2 ESGE does not recommend radiological evaluation for patients with nonbony food bolus impaction without complications. We recommend plain radiography to assess the presence, location, size, configuration, and number of ingested foreign bodies if ingestion of radiopaque objects is suspected or type of object is unknown (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 3 ESGE recommends computed tomography (CT) scan in all patients with suspected perforation or other complication that may require surgery (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 4 ESGE does not recommend barium swallow, because of the risk of aspiration and worsening of the endoscopic visualization (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 5 ESGE recommends clinical observation without the need for endoscopic removal for management of asymptomatic patients with ingestion of blunt and small objects (except batteries and magnets). If feasible, outpatient management is appropriate (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 6 ESGE recommends close observation in asymptomatic individuals who have concealed packets of drugs by swallowing ("body packing"). We recommend against endoscopic retrieval. We recommend surgical referral in cases of suspected packet rupture, failure of packets to progress, or intestinal obstruction (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). Endoscopic measures 7 ESGE recommends emergent (preferably within 2 hours, but at the latest within 6 hours) therapeutic esophagogastroduodenoscopy for foreign bodies inducing complete esophageal obstruction, and for sharp-pointed objects or batteries in the esophagus. We recommend urgent (within 24 hours) therapeutic esophagogastroduodenoscopy for other esophageal foreign bodies without complete obstruction (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 8 ESGE suggests treatment of food bolus impaction in the esophagus by gently pushing the bolus into the stomach. If this procedure is not successful, retrieval should be considered (weak recommendation, low quality evidence). The effectiveness of medical treatment of esophageal food bolus impaction is debated. It is therefore recommended, that medical treatment should not delay endoscopy (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 9 In cases of food bolus impaction, ESGE recommends a diagnostic work-up for potential underlying disease, including histological evaluation, in addition to therapeutic endoscopy (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 10 ESGE recommends urgent (within 24 hours) therapeutic esophagogastroduodenoscopy for foreign bodies in the stomach such as sharp-pointed objects, magnets, batteries and large/long objects. We suggest nonurgent (within 72 hours) therapeutic esophagogastroduodenoscopy for medium-sized blunt foreign bodies in the stomach (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 11 ESGE recommends the use of a protective device in order to avoid esophagogastric/pharyngeal damage and aspiration during endoscopic extraction of sharp-pointed foreign bodies. Endotracheal intubation should be considered in the case of high risk of aspiration (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 12 ESGE suggests the use of suitable extraction devices according to the type and location of the ingested foreign body (weak recommendation, low quality evidence). 13 After successful and uncomplicated endoscopic removal of ingested foreign bodies, ESGE suggests that the patient may be discharged. If foreign bodies are not or cannot be removed, a case-by-case approach depending on the size and type of the foreign body is suggested (weak recommendation, low quality evidence).


Asunto(s)
Endoscopía Gastrointestinal/métodos , Cuerpos Extraños , Adulto , Europa (Continente) , Cuerpos Extraños/diagnóstico , Cuerpos Extraños/cirugía , Gastroenterología/métodos , Gastroenterología/normas , Humanos , Sociedades Médicas , Tracto Gastrointestinal Superior/diagnóstico por imagen , Tracto Gastrointestinal Superior/patología , Tracto Gastrointestinal Superior/cirugía
8.
Pan Afr Med J ; 22: 41, 2015.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26664542

RESUMEN

Churg-Strauss syndrome is a small and medium vessel vasculitis and is also known as allergic granulomatous angiitis. Gastrointestinal involvement is common in patients with Churg-Strauss syndrome (20-50%). The most common symptoms are abdominal pain, diarrhoea and occasionally gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation. We present a case of Churg-Strauss syndrome with small bowel lesions documented by video capsule endoscopy.


Asunto(s)
Endoscopía Capsular/métodos , Síndrome de Churg-Strauss/diagnóstico , Intestino Delgado/patología , Dolor Abdominal/etiología , Adulto , Síndrome de Churg-Strauss/patología , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiología , Humanos , Masculino
12.
Endoscopy ; 47(10): a1-46, 2015 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26417980

RESUMEN

This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). It addresses the diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (NVUGIH). Main Recommendations MR1. ESGE recommends immediate assessment of hemodynamic status in patients who present with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH), with prompt intravascular volume replacement initially using crystalloid fluids if hemodynamic instability exists (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). MR2. ESGE recommends a restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy that aims for a target hemoglobin between 7 g/dL and 9 g/dL. A higher target hemoglobin should be considered in patients with significant co-morbidity (e. g., ischemic cardiovascular disease) (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). MR3. ESGE recommends the use of the Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS) for pre-endoscopy risk stratification. Outpatients determined to be at very low risk, based upon a GBS score of 0 - 1, do not require early endoscopy nor hospital admission. Discharged patients should be informed of the risk of recurrent bleeding and be advised to maintain contact with the discharging hospital (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). MR4. ESGE recommends initiating high dose intravenous proton pump inhibitors (PPI), intravenous bolus followed by continuous infusion (80 mg then 8 mg/hour), in patients presenting with acute UGIH awaiting upper endoscopy. However, PPI infusion should not delay the performance of early endoscopy (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). MR5. ESGE does not recommend the routine use of nasogastric or orogastric aspiration/lavage in patients presenting with acute UGIH (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). MR6. ESGE recommends intravenous erythromycin (single dose, 250 mg given 30 - 120 minutes prior to upper gastrointestinal [GI] endoscopy) in patients with clinically severe or ongoing active UGIH. In selected patients, pre-endoscopic infusion of erythromycin significantly improves endoscopic visualization, reduces the need for second-look endoscopy, decreases the number of units of blood transfused, and reduces duration of hospital stay (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). MR7. Following hemodynamic resuscitation, ESGE recommends early (≤ 24 hours) upper GI endoscopy. Very early (< 12 hours) upper GI endoscopy may be considered in patients with high risk clinical features, namely: hemodynamic instability (tachycardia, hypotension) that persists despite ongoing attempts at volume resuscitation; in-hospital bloody emesis/nasogastric aspirate; or contraindication to the interruption of anticoagulation (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). MR8. ESGE recommends that peptic ulcers with spurting or oozing bleeding (Forrest classification Ia and Ib, respectively) or with a nonbleeding visible vessel (Forrest classification IIa) receive endoscopic hemostasis because these lesions are at high risk for persistent bleeding or rebleeding (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). MR9. ESGE recommends that peptic ulcers with an adherent clot (Forrest classification IIb) be considered for endoscopic clot removal. Once the clot is removed, any identified underlying active bleeding (Forrest classification Ia or Ib) or nonbleeding visible vessel (Forrest classification IIa) should receive endoscopic hemostasis (weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence). MR10. In patients with peptic ulcers having a flat pigmented spot (Forrest classification IIc) or clean base (Forrest classification III), ESGE does not recommend endoscopic hemostasis as these stigmata present a low risk of recurrent bleeding. In selected clinical settings, these patients may be discharged to home on standard PPI therapy, e. g., oral PPI once-daily (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). MR11. ESGE recommends that epinephrine injection therapy not be used as endoscopic monotherapy. If used, it should be combined with a second endoscopic hemostasis modality (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). MR12. ESGE recommends PPI therapy for patients who receive endoscopic hemostasis and for patients with adherent clot not receiving endoscopic hemostasis. PPI therapy should be high dose and administered as an intravenous bolus followed by continuous infusion (80 mg then 8 mg/hour) for 72 hours post endoscopy (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). MR13. ESGE does not recommend routine second-look endoscopy as part of the management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (NVUGIH). However, in patients with clinical evidence of rebleeding following successful initial endoscopic hemostasis, ESGE recommends repeat upper endoscopy with hemostasis if indicated. In the case of failure of this second attempt at hemostasis, transcatheter angiographic embolization (TAE) or surgery should be considered (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). MR14. In patients with NVUGIH secondary to peptic ulcer, ESGE recommends investigating for the presence of Helicobacter pylori in the acute setting with initiation of appropriate antibiotic therapy when H. pylori is detected. Re-testing for H. pylori should be performed in those patients with a negative test in the acute setting. Documentation of successful H. pylori eradication is recommended (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). MR15. In patients receiving low dose aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prophylaxis who develop peptic ulcer bleeding, ESGE recommends aspirin be resumed immediately following index endoscopy if the risk of rebleeding is low (e. g., FIIc, FIII). In patients with high risk peptic ulcer (FIa, FIb, FIIa, FIIb), early reintroduction of aspirin by day 3 after index endoscopy is recommended, provided that adequate hemostasis has been established (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence).


Asunto(s)
Manejo de la Enfermedad , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal/normas , Gastroenterología , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/diagnóstico , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/terapia , Hemostasis Endoscópica/métodos , Sociedades Médicas , Europa (Continente) , Hemostasis Endoscópica/normas , Humanos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...