RESUMEN
Intragastric balloon (IGB) is a widely used, minimal invasive treatment for obesity. The IGB reduce gastric capacity and enhance feeling of fullness, thereby inducing weight loss. A rare, but severe complication to IGB treatment is gastric perforation. We present a rare case of gastric perforation, occurring shortly after a second IGB treatment. The patient was first treated with an Orbera® IGB for 12 months, exceeding the recommended treatment period of 6 months. Upon removal, esophagitis and gastritis was found. Therefore, insertion of the second IGB was postponed. After only 9 treatment-free days, a new endoscopy revealed a macroscopical normal gastric mucosa, and the second Orbera® IGB was inserted. The day after the insertion the patient was admitted to the hospital, due to extensive vomiting and mild epigastric pain. Three days after the insertion a gastric perforation was found. The patient underwent endoscopic removal of the IGB and laparoscopic suture of the perforation. The postoperative course was complicated due to recurrent multiple intra abdominal abscesses, treated with antibiotics, drainage and abscess puncture on several occasions. We suggest that patients should be carefully evaluated before IGB treatments are repeated, especially when gastritis is present. If the gastric mucosa is affected, sufficient time to let it heal is needed. The recommended treatment period should not be exceeded, and perforation should always be suspected as a differential diagnosis when patients present with abdominal symptoms after IGB insertion.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To investigate whether outpatient blue-light flexible cystoscopy could solve the diagnostic challenge of positive or suspicious urine cytology findings despite normal white-light flexible cystoscopy results and normal findings on computerized tomography urography, in patients investigated for urothelial cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a multicentre study, a total of 70 examinations were performed with the use of blue-light flexible cystoscopy (photodynamic diagnosis) after intravesical instillation of the fluorescence agent hexaminolevulinate. The examination started with a conventional white-light flexible cystoscopy and then the settings were switched to use blue light. Suspicious lesions were biopsied. Afterwards, the patients were interviewed regarding their experience of the examinations. RESULTS: Bladder cancer was diagnosed in 29 out of 70 (41%) cases, among them 14/29 (48%) had malignant lesions seen only in blue light. The majority had carcinoma in situ (21/29). Normal findings were seen in 41 cases that underwent BLFC. During the further course, malignancy of the bladder was detected in six cases (9%) and malignancy of the upper urinary tract was detected in one case (1%). The majority of patients (93%) preferred the blue-light flexible cystoscopy performed at the outpatient clinic instead of the transurethral resection under general anaesthesia. CONCLUSION: Blue-light flexible cystoscopy at the outpatient clinic may be a useful tool to solve unclear cases of a malignant or suspicious urinary cytology suggestive of bladder cancer. The procedure was well tolerated by the patients.