Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Ann Gastroenterol ; 30(5): 512-517, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28845106

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Currently, colonoscopy and polypectomy are the gold standard methods for the prevention of incident cases of colorectal cancer. The use of a new colonoscope (Fuse®, EndoChoice®) with a larger view of up to 330° appears to improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR). We performed a prospective observational study concerning this scope. The primary endpoint was potentially omitted adenomas (POA), i.e. adenomas seen on the side screens that will not appear on the central display during colonoscopy withdrawal without oriented movements. Secondary endpoints included our ADR, Fuse® impact on ADR, time to cecal intubation and withdrawal time. METHODS: We performed a single-center prospective study in one French center. We enrolled patients over 18 years of age between January 2015 and March 2016. RESULTS: We included 141 patients; 3 were excluded because their colonoscopies were incomplete. Our study included 78 men and 60 women (sex ratio 1.3). The mean age was 60.4 years. A total of 130 polyps were resected. In all, 88/130 were adenomas (68%) and 34/88 adenomas (39%) were POA. The mean time to cecum was 10 min, and the mean withdrawal time was 12 min. ADR was 35% for men and 31% for women. The estimated ADR without POA was 29% for men and 19% for women. CONCLUSIONS: The Fuse® system appears to be safe and efficient. POA represented 39% of all adenomas. The impact of the panoramic view on the ADR was considered substantial. The main limitations are the lack of randomization and the absence of a control group.

2.
Ann Gastroenterol ; 30(1): 62-66, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28042239

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Strictures are frequent complications of large endoscopic mucosal resections (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissections of the esophagus. Local or systemic steroid therapy has shown promise in the prevention of secondary stenosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of systemic steroid therapy following endoscopic resection of at least hemi-circumferential esophageal mucosa. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study in a tertiary center. We evaluated patients who were treated with oral steroids between July 2013 and September 2015, after undergoing a large EMR for Barrett's esophagus associated with dysplasia or carcinoma. The steroid protocol used was an initial dose of 30 mg prednisolone, tapered over 8 weeks. Exclusion criteria were a previous attempt at radiofrequency ablation or resection. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients (27 men) were analyzed: 13 with low-grade dysplasia Barrett's esophagus, 16 with in situ adenocarcinoma, 1 with pT1SM1 adenocarcinoma, and 1 with pT1SM2 adenocarcinoma. Twenty-eight resections (28/31) were completed (R0) in 1-3 sessions (median 2), while 3 resections were R1. The median length of Barrett's esophagus was C3M5 (range C0M2-C10M11) according to the Prague classification. The median follow up was 10 months (range 4-17), during which 4 patients (13%) developed a secondary stenosis. All stenoses were successfully treated by endoscopic dilation (range 1-4). No complications related to dilation or to the steroid therapy were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our rate of secondary stricture was lower than expected, given the rates of 17-88% in published studies. Systemic oral steroid therapy seems to be effective in reducing potential esophageal stenosis after EMR. Complementary randomized studies are required to confirm whether systemic steroids are an effective primary prophylaxis for esophageal stenosis.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...