RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: We assessed efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) vs. endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as first-line intervention in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). METHODS: PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched until 01 /12 /2023 for randomized controlled trials of EUS-BD vs. ERCP for primary biliary drainage in patients with inoperable MDBO. The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes were clinical success, adverse events, mean procedure time, 1-year stent patency, and overall survival. Relative risk (RR) with 95 %CI were calculated using a random effects model. RESULTS: Five studies (519 patients) were included. RR (95 %CI) for EUS-BD was 1.06 (0.96 to 1.17; P = 0.27) for pooled technical success and 1.02 (0.97 to 1.08; P = 0.45) for clinical success. 1-year stent patency was similar between the groups (RR 1.15, 0.94 to 1.42; P = 0.17), with lower reintervention with EUS-BD (RR 0.58, 0.37 to 0.9; P = 0.01). The RR was 0.85 (0.49 to 1.46; P = 0.55) for adverse events and 0.97 (0.10 to 0.17; P = 0.98) for severe adverse events. On subgroup analysis, EUS-guided placement of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) outperformed ERCP in terms of technical success (RR 1.17, 1.01 to 1.35; P = 0.03). Procedure time was lower with EUS-BD (standardized mean difference -2.36 minutes [-2.68 to -2.05; P < 0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-BD showed a statistically significant lower reintervention rate than ERCP, but with similar technical success, stent patency, clinical success, and safety. Technical success of EUS-BD with LAMS was better than ERCP.

RESUMEN

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has recognized the need to formalize and enhance training in diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). This manuscript represents the outcome of a formal Delphi process resulting in an official Position Statement of the ESGE and provides a framework to develop and maintain skills in diagnostic EUS. This curriculum is set out in terms of the prerequisites prior to training; the recommended steps of training to a defined syllabus; the quality of training; and how competence should be defined and evidenced before independent practice. 1: Trainees should have achieved competence in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy before training in diagnostic EUS. 2: The development of diagnostic EUS skills by methods that do not involve patients is advisable, but not mandatory, prior to commencing formal training in diagnostic EUS. 3: A trainee's principal trainer should be performing adequate volumes of diagnostic EUSs to demonstrate maintenance of their own competence. 4: Training centers for diagnostic EUS should offer expertise, as well as a high volume of procedures per year, to ensure an optimal level of quality for training. Under these conditions, training centers should be able to provide trainees with a sufficient wealth of experience in diagnostic EUS for at least 12 months. 5: Trainees should engage in formal training and supplement this with a range of learning resources for diagnostic EUS, including EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy (FNA/FNB). 6: EUS training should follow a structured syllabus to guide the learning program. 7: A minimum procedure volume should be offered to trainees during diagnostic EUS training to ensure that they have the opportunity to achieve competence in the technique. To evaluate competence in diagnostic EUS, trainees should have completed a minimum of 250 supervised EUS procedures: 80 for luminal tumors, 20 for subepithelial lesions, and 150 for pancreaticobiliary lesions. At least 75 EUS-FNA/FNBs should be performed, including mostly pancreaticobiliary lesions. 8: Competence assessment in diagnostic EUS should take into consideration not only technical skills, but also cognitive and integrative skills. A reliable valid assessment tool should be used regularly during diagnostic EUS training to track the acquisition of competence and to support trainee feedback. 9: A period of supervised practice should follow the start of independent activity. Supervision can be delivered either on site if other colleagues are already practicing EUS or by maintaining contacts with the training center and/or other EUS experts. 10: Key performance measures including the annual number of procedures, frequency of obtaining a diagnostic sample during EUS-FNA/FNB, and adverse events should be recorded within an electronic documentation system and evaluated.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Antibioprohylaxis (ABP) for pancreatic cystic lesion is still a debated clinical indication. Although professional societies guidelines still recommend ABP in endoscopic ultrasound-fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL), this standard of care recommendation was based on old and weakly planned studies with a small number of patients. Herein, in this work, we provide a critical review with pooled data analysis of the available literature. Overall, the studies reported are weak and limited with small number of patients, the absence of exact definition of infection and the heterogenicity of the type and the duration of the ABP used. Pooled data analysis showed that the effect of ABP on the rate of cyst infection was not significant (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.17-1.2), with no significant heterogenicity between the results of the studies reviewed and reported (as assessed by Breslow Day test for homogeneity of OR's [P = 0.15]). The pooled infection rate without ABP was 0.89% and 0.36% in the ABP group. Moreover, according to the pooled data infection rate, sample size calculation demonstrated that 6954 patients are needed to show superiority of ABP, with a number needed to treat of 179 patients to prevent single infection. However, through the literature only six studies (1660 patients) reported the cyst infection rate among ABP versus control, making these results scarce and biased by a small number of patients. Therefore, we suggest the need to revise the guidelines, until performing well organized large international study to solve this controversy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is a reliable and efficient modality for detecting pancreatic tumors; however, plain EUS (P-EUS) is limited with respect to characterization of pancreatic tumors. Recently, the use of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) has increased, and its utility for characterization of pancreatic tumors has been reported. This meta-analysis compares the diagnostic ability of P-EUS with that of CH-EUS for characterization of pancreatic tumors. Methods A systematic meta-analysis of all potentially relevant articles in PubMed, the Cochrane library, and Google Scholar databases was performed. Fixed effects or random effects models were used to investigate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio, with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Results This meta-analysis included 719 patients who underwent CH-EUS and 723 who underwent P-EUS, from six eligible studies. The pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were 93 % (95 % CI, 0.90-0.95), 80 % (95 % CI, 0.75-0.85), and 57.9 (95 % CI, 25.9-130), respectively, for CH-EUS, and 86 % (95 % CI, 0.82-0.89), 59 % (95 % CI, 0.52-0.65), and 8.3 (95 % CI, 2.8-24.5) for P-EUS. The areas under the summary receiver operating characteristics curves for CH-EUS and P-EUS were 0.96 and 0.80, respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio for pancreatic cancer was 2.98 times higher on CH-EUS than on P-EUS ( P  = 0.03). Funnel plots demonstrated no publication bias. Conclusions This meta-analysis demonstrates that CH-EUS has higher diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic cancer than P-EUS, and is thus a valuable tool for characterization of pancreatic tumors.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic papillectomy (EP) is an effective curative treatment in patients with ampullary adenomas. However, EP is burdened by a not-negligible risk of bleeding. The aim of this study was to determine risk factors for delayed bleeding after EP. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively-collected database was performed, retrieving all EP performed over a 20-year period. Anti-thrombotic treatments were managed according to guidelines. Delayed bleeding was defined as overt gastrointestinal bleeding or drop in haemoglobin level. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify variables related to delayed bleeding. RESULTS: Three-hundred-seven patients (48.5% male, median age 68-year-old) entered the study; of them, 51 (16.6%) received anti-thrombotic treatments. Delayed bleeding occurred in 44 (14.3%) patients. No difference was observed in patients receiving antiplatelet agents. Multivariate analysis identified oral anticoagulant agents (odd Ratio 4.37 [2.86-5.95]) and procedural bleeding (OR 2.22 [1.10-4.40]) as independently related to delayed bleeding; in patients with no procedural bleeding, oral anticoagulant agents (OR 5.63 [2.25-9.83]) and ampullary tumor size (OR 1.07 [1.01-1.13]) were independently related to delayed bleeding. Patients on anticoagulant agents presented significantly higher need for blood transfusion (16.7 vs. 1.5%); no difference in intensive care unit admission, surgery or mortality was observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that patients on oral antiplatelet agents do not present increased risk for post-EP delayed bleeding. EP represents a valid alternative to surgery even in patients on anticoagulant agents, despite significantly increased risk of delayed bleeding. A tailored approach to those cases should be planned.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

1: ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) as the best tool to characterize subepithelial lesion (SEL) features (size, location, originating layer, echogenicity, shape), but EUS alone is not able to distinguish among all types of SEL.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests providing tissue diagnosis for all SELs with features suggestive of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) if they are of size > 20 mm, or have high risk stigmata, or require surgical resection or oncological treatment.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) equally for tissue diagnosis of SELs ≥ 20 mm in size.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends against surveillance of asymptomatic gastrointestinal (GI) tract leiomyomas, lipomas, heterotopic pancreas, granular cell tumors, schwannomas, and glomus tumors, if the diagnosis is clear.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests surveillance of asymptomatic esophageal and gastric SELs without definite diagnosis, with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) at 3-6 months, and then at 2-3-year intervals for lesions < 10 mm in size, and at 1-2-year intervals for lesions 10-20 mm in size. For asymptomatic SELs > 20 mm in size that are not resected, ESGE suggests surveillance with EGD plus EUS at 6 months and then at 6-12-month intervals.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends endoscopic resection for type 1 gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) if they grow larger than 10 mm. The choice of resection technique should depend on size, depth of invasion, and location in the stomach.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests considering removal of histologically proven gastric GISTs smaller than 20 mm as an alternative to surveillance. The decision to resect should be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting. The choice of technique should depend on size, location, and local expertise.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that, to avoid unnecessary follow-up, endoscopic resection is an option for gastric SELs smaller than 20 mm and of unknown histology after failure of attempts to obtain diagnosis.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends basing the surveillance strategy on the type and completeness of resection. After curative resection of benign SELs no follow-up is advised, except for type 1 gastric NEN for which surveillance at 1-2 years is advised.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 10: For lower or upper GI NEN with a positive or indeterminate margin at resection, ESGE recommends repeating endoscopy at 3-6 months and another attempt at endoscopic resection in the case of residual disease.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: standard B-mode EUS assessment and EUS-guided tissue acquisition present sub-optimal diagnostic yield in the differential diagnosis of gastric submucosal tumors (SMTs). AIMS: to evaluate the performances of contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography (CH-EUS) to differentiate gastric SMTs and predict malignancy risk of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). METHODS: a retrospective analysis was performed retrieving consecutive patients with gastric SMTs who underwent EUS between 2009 and 2014. Patients with available EUS video recordings and histological diagnosis were included. De-identified videos were presented to experts who made a diagnosis on B-mode EUS and CH-EUS. RESULTS: fifty-four patients (29 female, 64-year-old) were included. Final diagnoses were 40 GISTs (8 high-grade), 9 leiomyomas, 5 rare SMTs. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of B-mode and CH-EUS for the differential diagnosis of GIST were 95.0% vs. 85.0%, 57.1% for both techniques, and 85.2% vs. 77.8%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of B-mode and CH-EUS for the estimation of the malignancy GISTs risk were 62.5% vs. 100%, 83.3% vs. 82.1%, and 78.9% vs. 86.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CH-EUS showed better diagnostic performance than B-mode EUS in differentiating leiomyomas and risk stratification of GIST. When considering high-grade GISTs, the addition of CH-EUS allowed an improvement in diagnostic accuracy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) carry a considerable malignancy risk. Along with main duct dilation, the presence of enhanced mural nodules represents a significant risk factor for malignancy. Several articles assessed the role of contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS) for the identification of malignant features in mural nodules. We evaluate the pooled diagnostic performance of CE-EUS for the identification of high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma among mural nodules in PCNs. METHODS: A systematic review (Medline, PubMed, EMBASE) and meta-analysis were conducted. Subgroup analysis was used to assess the usefulness of a dedicated contrast-harmonic (CH-EUS). The primary outcome was pooled sensitivity for identification of high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma. RESULTS: Ten studies (532 patients) were included. Pooled sensitivity of CE-EUS was 88.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82.7%-92.5%), specificity 79.1% (95% CI, 74.5%-83.3%), and diagnostic accuracy 89.6% (95% CI, 83.4%-95.8%). Eight studies (320 patients) were conducted using CH-EUS: pooled sensitivity increased to 97.0% (95% CI, 92.5%-99.2%), specificity to 90.4% (95% CI, 85.2%-94.2%), and diagnostic accuracy to 95.6% (95% CI, 92.6%-98.7%). At 42% disease prevalence (pretest probability), a positive CH-EUS increased the disease probability to 88%, whereas a negative test decreased the disease probability to 2%. The number needed to diagnose was 1.5 (95% CI, 1.7-1.3) for CE-EUS and just 1.2 (95% CI, 1.3-1.1) for CH-EUS. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided robust evidence on CE-EUS value for the characterization of mural nodules within PCNs. A dedicated contrast-harmonic mode, namely CH-EUS, provided an increased diagnostic yield in the identification and characterization of malignant mural nodules.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has majorly affected medical activity around the world. We sought to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy activity in France. METHODS: We performed a web-based survey, including 35 questions on the responders and their endoscopic practice, from 23 March to 27 March 2020, sent to the 3300 French gastroenterologists practicing endoscopy. RESULTS: 694 GI endoscopists (21 %) provided analyzable data; of these, 29.4 % (204/694) were involved in the management of COVID-19 patients outside the endoscopy department. During the study period, 98.7 % (685/694) of endoscopists had had to cancel procedures. There were 89 gastroenterologists (12.8 %) who reported symptoms compatible with COVID-19 infection, and a positive PCR test was recorded in 12/197 (6.1 %) vs. 3/497 (0.6 %) endoscopists in the high vs. low prevalence areas, respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a major reduction in the volume of GI endoscopies performed in France in March 2020. The prolonged limited access to GI endoscopy could lead to a delay in the management of patients with GI cancers.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: This document is a summary of the French Intergroup guidelines regarding the management of digestive neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) published in February 2020 (www.tncd.org). METHODS: All French medical societies involved in the management of NEN took part in this work. Recommendations were graded into four categories (A, B, C or D), according to the level of evidence found in the literature until May 2019. RESULTS: The management of NEN is challenging because of their heterogeneity and the increasing complexity of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Pathological analysis is required for their diagnostic and prognostic characterization, which mainly relies on differentiation, grade and stage. The two main emergency situations are functioning syndromes and poorly-differentiated carcinoma. Chromogranin A is the main biochemical marker of NET, although of limited clinical interest. Initial characterization relies on morphological and isotopic imaging. The treatment of localized NET relies on watchful follow-up and local or surgical resection depending on its supposed aggressiveness. Treatment options for metastatic disease include surgery, somatostatin analogues, chemotherapy, targeted therapies, organ-driven locoregional therapies and peptide-receptor radionuclide therapy. As specific predictive factors of treatment efficacy are yet to be identified and head-to-head comparisons have not or only rarely been performed, the therapeutic strategy currently depends on prognostic factors. Cumulative toxicity and the impact of treatment on quality of life must be considered since survival is relatively long in most patients with NET. CONCLUSION: These guidelines are proposed to achieve the most beneficial therapeutic strategy in clinical practice as the therapeutic landscape of NEN is becoming ever more complex. These recommendations are permanently being reviewed.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The diagnosis and therapeutic management of large single pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) represent major issues for clinicians and essentially rely on endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) findings. Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE) has high diagnostic performance for PCLs. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of nCLE on the therapeutic management of patients with single PCLs. METHODS: Retrospective and comparative study. Five independent pancreatic disease experts from tertiary hospitals independently reviewed data from a prospective database of 206 patients with single PCL, larger than 2 cm and who underwent EUS-FNA and nCLE. Two evaluations were performed. The first one included the sequential review of clinical information, EUS report and FNA results. The second one included the same data + nCLE report. Participants had to propose a therapeutic management for each case. RESULTS: The addition of nCLE to EUS-FNA led to significant changes in therapeutic management for 28% of the patients (p < 0.001). nCLE significantly increased the interobserver agreement of 0.28 (p < 0.0001), from 0.36 (CI 95% 0.33-0.49) to 0.64 (CI 95% 0.61-0.67). nCLE improved the rates of full agreement among the five experts of 24% (p < 0.0001), from 30 to 54%. With nCLE, the surveillance rate of benign SCAs fell by 35%, from 40 (28/70) to 5% (4/76). CONCLUSION: The addition of nCLE to EUS-FNA significantly improves reliability of PCL diagnosis and could impact the therapeutic management of patients with single PCLs. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01563133.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background and aims This study aimed to evaluate the performance of Macroscopic On-site Evaluation (MOSE) using a novel endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) fine needle biopsy (FNB) needle (22-G Franseen-tip needle, Acquire, Boston Scientific Incorporated, Boston, Massachusetts, United States), and without using Rapid On-Site Evaluation (ROSE). Method Between May 2016 and August 2016, all consecutive patients referred to our center for EUS tissue acquisition (TA) for solid lesions underwent EUS-FNB with the 22-G Franseen-tip needle unless contra-indicated. The operator performed MOSE. If no macroscopic core was visualized, a second pass was performed. The final diagnosis was defined as unequivocal histology from EUS-TA with compatible 18 months follow-up, surgical resection, or both. We retrospectively analyzed the performance of MOSE. Results A total of 46 consecutive patients was included, and 54 solid lesions were biopsied. The endosonographer visualized core tissue in 93 % (50/54) of targets with a single pass, of which the pathologist confirmed histologic core fragments in 94 % (47/50). Four lesions required two passes, and the overall correlation between MOSE and histologic core fragments was 94 % (48/51). Diagnostic adequacy was 98 % (53/54) with one biliary target biopsied without significant material. The overall diagnostic accuracy was 94 %. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for malignancy were 92 %, 100 %, 100 %, and 81 %, respectively. No adverse events were reported. Conclusion Our study demonstrated that MOSE using the 22-G Franseen-tip needle could limit needle passes by accurately estimating histologic core fragments. It also demonstrated that high diagnostic adequacy and accuracy of > 90 % could be achieved without ROSE.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The aim of this prospective multicenter study was to compare a flexible 19 G needle with nitinol shaft (19 G Flex) with a standard 22 G needle for transduodenal endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling of pancreatic head tumors. METHODS: Patients with pancreatic head tumors requiring tissue diagnosis were randomized into two arms: puncture with either a 19 G Flex needle or a 22 G needle. The primary end point was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy. The secondary end points were ergonomic scores, sample cytohistological quality, and complications. A 6-month follow-up was performed. RESULTS: 125 patients were randomized and 122 were analyzed: 59 patients in the 19 G Flex arm and 63 patients in the 22 G arm. The final diagnosis was malignancy in 111 patients and benign condition in 11. In intention-to-treat analysis, the diagnostic accuracy for malignancy of the 19 G Flex and 22 G needles was 69.5 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 56.1 % - 80.8 %) vs. 87.3 % (95 %CI 76.5 % - 94.4 %), respectively (P = 0.02). In per-protocol analysis excluding eight technical failures in the 19 G Flex group, the diagnostic accuracy of the 19 G Flex and 22 G needles was not statistically different: 80.4 % (95 %CI 66.9 % - 90.2 %) vs. 87.3 % (95 %CI 76.5 % - 94.4 %; P = 0.12). Technical success was higher in the 22 G arm than in the 19 G Flex arm: 100 % (95 %CI 94.3 % - 100 %) vs. 86.4 % (95 %CI 75.0 % - 94.0 %), respectively (P = 0.003). Transduodenal EUS-guided sampling was more difficult with the 19 G Flex (odds ratio 0.68, 95 %CI 0.47 - 0.97). CONCLUSION : The 19 G Flex needle was inferior to a standard 22 G needle in diagnosing pancreatic head cancer and more difficult to use in the transduodenal approach.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Current imaging modalities are limited in their ability to distinguish pancreatic cancer (PC) from non-neoplastic pancreatic lesions. The diagnostic use of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography (CE-EUS) has increased, and its utility has been reported. Recently, contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) was reported to facilitate imaging of parenchymal perfusion and microvessels in pancreatobiliary diseases, leading to a high diagnostic accuracy for PC. The present meta-analysis aims to investigate the usefulness of CH-EUS with enhancement pattern for PC diagnosis. METHODS: A systematic meta-analysis of all potentially relevant articles identified in PubMed, the Cochrane library, and Medline was carried out. Fixed-effects or random-effects models were used to investigate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The study enrolled 887 patients from nine eligible studies. Pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 93% (95% CI, 0.91-0.95) and 80% (95% CI, 0.75-0.85), respectively. Subgroup analyses were carried out on the main results after excluding two outliers. Area under summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.97. No publication bias was found using funnel plots. No significant relationship was found between the diagnostic odds ratios and the characteristics of the studies including continent and contrast agent. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis showed that CH-EUS with qualitative analysis of enhancement pattern is useful for the diagnosis of PC, and has high sensitivity and accuracy, regardless of the type of contrast agent used. This modality may provide improved diagnostic accuracy for PC in clinical practice.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Acute hepatitis E virus infection during pregnancy has a high fatality rate in developing countries. Little data are available on chronic infection in pregnant women. We report a case of chronic hepatitis E during treatment with infliximab and azathioprine, without adverse event during pregnancy and with spontaneous resolution after delivery.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal angiodysplasias (GIADs) could be responsible for recurrent bleeding and severe anemia. Somatostatin analogs could reduce transfusion requirements in these patients but no randomized controlled study is available. The main objective of the ANGIOPAS phase II double-blinded randomized, noncomparative study was to assess the effectiveness of pasireotide-LAR in reducing transfusion requirements in patients with refractory GIADs bleeding. METHODS: A total of 22 patients with transfusion requirements ⩾6 units of packed red blood cells (pRBCs) during the 6 months prior to inclusion were randomized to receive pasireotide-LAR 60 mg (n = 10) or placebo (n = 12) every 28 days for 6 months. Patients were then followed for an additional 6 months after stopping treatment. RESULTS: The pasireotide-LAR and placebo groups were equivalent for age, sex, comorbidities and transfusion requirement during the reference period (median 13 and 9.5 pRBCs). A 50 and 83% success rate (success defined as a decrease of at least 30% of transfused pRBCs) was observed in the pasireotide-LAR arm in the Intent to Treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analysis respectively. The need for transfusion during the intervention period was 3 pRBC units in the pasireotide-LAR group (range 0-26) and 11.5 pRBC units in the placebo group (range 0-23). Overall, three cases with glycemic control impairment were observed in the pasireotide-LAR group including one de novo diabetes. CONCLUSION: This double-blinded noncomparative randomized phase II study suggests, for the first time, the effectiveness of pasireotide-LAR 60 mg every 28 days to decrease the transfusion requirement in patients with recurrent bleeding due to GIADs.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Some patients (10 % - 32 %) with a positive guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) do not undergo the recommended colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to compare video capsule endoscopy (VCE) and computed tomography colonography (CTC) in terms of participation rate and detection outcomes when offered to patients with a positive gFOBT who did not undergo the recommended colonoscopy. METHODS: An invitation letter offering CTC or VCE was sent to selected patients after randomization. Acceptance of the proposed (or alternative) procedure and procedure results were recorded. Sample size was evaluated according to the hypothesis of a 13 % increase of participation with VCE. RESULTS: A total of 756 patients were targeted. Following the invitation letter, 5.0 % (19/378) of patients underwent the proposed VCE and 7.4 % (28/378) underwent CTC, (P = 0.18). Following the letter, 9.8 % (37/378) of patients in the VCE group underwent a diagnostic procedure (19 VCE, 1 CTC, 17 colonoscopy) vs. 10.8 % in the CTC group (41/378: 28 CTC, 13 colonoscopy; P = 0.55). There were more potentially neoplastic lesions diagnosed in the VCE group than in the CTC group (12/20 [60.0 %] vs. 8/28 [28.6 %]; P = 0.04). Thus, 15/20 noninvasive procedures in the VCE group (19 VCE, 1 CTC; 75.0 %) vs. 10/28 in the CTC group (35.7 %; P = 0.01) resulted in a recommendation of further colonoscopy, but only 10/25 patients actually underwent this proposed colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: Patients with a positive gFOBT result who do not undergo the recommended colonoscopy are difficult to recruit to the screening program and simply proposing an additional, less-invasive procedure, such as VCE or CTC, is not an effective strategy.ClinicalTrials.govNCT02558881TRIAL REGISTRATION: Randomized, controlled trial NCT02558881 at clinicaltrials.gov.

Asunto(s)