RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: This study compared the accuracy of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal tumors in patients with several degrees of clinical suspicion. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We recruited patients that were suspect for gastrointestinal neoplasia but with no evidence of localizing symptoms (group A), and patients that were suspect for colon cancer (group B) or for gastric cancer (group C). Accuracy in the diagnosis was compared for: gastric cancer in groups A and C, and for colon cancer in groups A and B. The comparison was made by using the contingency coefficient, which quantifies coincidence of endoscopic and ultrasonographic diagnoses. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients were included in group A (48 males), wherein 12 colon and 5 gastric neoplasms were detected. Group B was comprised of 153 patients (78 males) and included 66 patients with colorectal cancer (CCR). Group C contained 58 patients (35 males), 31 of whom were diagnosed with gastric cancer. The accuracy of sonography for diagnosing colon cancer was 95.5% for group A and 87.5% for group B. The contingency coefficient for endoscopy vs. ultrasonography was greater for group A: 0.658 than for group B: 0.549. The diagnostic accuracy for gastric cancer was 97.4% for group A and 86.2% for group C. The contingency coefficient between endoscopic and ultrasonographic diagnoses was also greater in group A (0.618) than in group C (0.588). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of ultrasonography in diagnosing colon and gastric cancer is not lower in patients without localizing symptoms.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introducción y objetivos: en todos los estudios publicadoshasta la fecha se ha evaluado la precisión de la ecografía en eldiagnóstico del cáncer de colon y del cáncer gástrico en pacientesen los que esta era la sospecha diagnóstica o ya con un diagnósticoestablecido de esta patología. Nosotros, en este estudio, comparamosla sensibilidad de la ecografía en pacientes con diferentesgrados de sospecha clínica.Material y método: reclutamos pacientes con sospecha deneoplasia digestiva, sin evidencia de síntomas localizadores (grupoA), pacientes con sospecha de cáncer de colon (grupo B) y pacientescon sospecha de cáncer gástrico (grupo C). Comparamosla precisión de la ecografía en el diagnóstico del cáncer gástricoen los grupos A y C, y la precisión en el diagnóstico del cáncer decolon en los grupos A y B. El parámetro usado en la comparaciónes el coeficiente de contigencia que cuantifica la coincidencia dediagnóstico endoscópico y ecográfico.Resultados: se han incluido 79 pacientes en el grupo A (48varones y 31 mujeres, con una edad media de 69,3 años), en losque se han diagnosticado 12 neoplasias colónicas y 5 gástricas. Elgrupo B se compone de 153 pacientes (78 varones y 75 mujeres,con una edad media de 66,5 años) e incluye 66 pacientes conCCR. Finalmente, el grupo C está formado por 58 pacientes (35varones y 23 mujeres, con una edad media de 67,4 años), siendodiagnosticados de cáncer gástrico 31 pacientes. La precisión de laecografía en el diagnóstico del cáncer de colon fue del 95,5% enel grupo A y del 87,5% en el grupo B. El coeficiente de contingenciaentre los diagnósticos endoscópico y ecográfico tambiénfue superior en el grupo A: 0,658 frente a 0,549. La precisión dela ecografía en el diagnóstico del cáncer gástrico fue del 97,4% enel grupo A y del 86,2% en el grupo C...(AU)

Introduction and objectives: this study compared the accuracyof ultrasonography in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal tumorsin patients with several degrees of clinical suspicion.Material and methods: we recruited patients that were suspectfor gastrointestinal neoplasia but with no evidence of localizingsymptoms (group A), and patients that were suspect for coloncancer (group B) or for gastric cancer (group C). Accuracy in thediagnosis was compared for: gastric cancer in groups A and C,and for colon cancer in groups A and B. The comparison wasmade by using the contingency coefficient, which quantifies coincidenceof endoscopic and ultrasonographic diagnoses.Results: seventy-nine patients were included in group A (48males), wherein 12 colon and 5 gastric neoplasms were detected.Group B was comprised of 153 patients (78 males) and included66 patients with colorectal cancer (CCR). Group C contained 58patients (35 males), 31 of whom were diagnosed with gastric cancer.The accuracy of sonography for diagnosing colon cancer was95.5% for group A and 87.5% for group B. The contingency coefficientfor endoscopy vs. ultrasonography was greater for groupA: 0.658 than for group B: 0.549. The diagnostic accuracy forgastric cancer was 97.4% for group A and 86.2% for group C.The contingency coefficient between endoscopic and ultrasonographicdiagnoses was also greater in group A (0.618) than ingroup C (0.588).Conclusions: the accuracy of ultrasonography in diagnosingcolon and gastric cancer is not lower in patients without localizingsymptoms(AU)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

No disponible

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introducción: el cáncer de colon es una de las principalescausas de muerte por cáncer. Su diagnóstico exige la exploración de la totalidad del marco colónico mediante técnicas radiológicas o endoscópicas. Muchos pacientes son remitidos para la realización de colonoscopia con sospecha de cáncer de colon y esta sospecha no se confirma tras la exploración endoscópica. El objetivodel estudio es la evaluación de la fiabilidad de la ecografía abdominal en el diagnóstico de estos tumores.Material y método: se seleccionaron pacientes que fueronremitidos a la unidad de endoscopias para la práctica de una colonoscopia con sospecha de cáncer de colon. A todos ellos se les realizó una ecografía abdominal previa a la endoscopia. Considerando como patrón oro la exploración endoscópica, se evaluó la sensibilidad, especificidad, valor predictivo positivo (VPP) y negativo (VPN) de la ecografía. Asimismo, se evaluaron una serie de parámetrosclínicos y analíticos, realizándose un análisis univariante y multivariante, tratando de establecer factores asociados al padecimiento de un cáncer de colon. El análisis estadístico se realizó mediante el paquete estadístico SPSS 12.0 para Windows. Resultados: se incluyeron definitivamente 145 pacientes (56,6% varones) con una edad media de 66,72 (22-89). Se diagnosticóun cáncer en 42 casos (28,9%). La ecografía abdominalpresenta una sensibilidad del 79,06%, una especificidad del 92,15%, un VPP y un VPN del 80,9% y del 91,2% respectivamente en el diagnóstico del cáncer de colon. Excluyendo del análisis las lesiones de la ampolla rectal, que no puede ser valorada adecuadamente mediante la ecografía, las cifras de sensibilidad, especificidad, VPP y VPN ascienden a un 91,8, 92,1, 80,9 y 96,9% respectivamente. El análisis univariante mostró como una edad superior a 65 años y la presencia de microcitosis se asociaron a un mayor riesgo de padecer cáncer de colon, mientras que tras el análisis multivariante sólo la presencia de microcitosis resultó ser un factor independiente predictivo de cáncer. Conclusiones: la ecografía abdominal presenta una elevada sensibilidad, especificidad, VPP y VPN en el diagnóstico de cáncerde colon. La combinación de una ecografía y una rectoscopia permite descartar con gran seguridad la presencia de un carcinoma colorrectal. En los pacientes con microcitosis y posiblemente en los mayores de 65 años, si la sospecha clínica es importante, unaecografía negativa puede no ser suficiente para descartar una neoplasia colorrectal

Introduction: colon cancer is one of the main causes of cancer death. Diagnosis requires the examination of the entire large bowel by means of radiological or endoscopic techniques. Many patients suspect of colon cancer are referred for colonoscopy but nevertheless this suspicion is not confirmed after endoscopic examination. The objective of this study is the evaluation of the reliability of abdominal ultrasound in the diagnosis of these tumors. Material and method: we selected patients suspect of colon cancer referred to the endoscopy unit for a colonoscopy. An abdominal ultrasound was carried out on all patients prior to the endoscopy. Considering the endoscopic examination as a gold standard, the sensibility, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of the ultrasonography were evaluated. Likewise, a series of analytical and clinical parameters were evaluated, in an attempt to establish associated factors of a colon cancer. The statistical analysis was carried out by means of the statistical package SPSS 12.0 for Windows. Results: 145 patients were included in the study (56.6% males) with an average 66.72 years of age (22-89). A cancer was diagnosed in 42 cases (28.9%). In the diagnosis of colon cancer, abdominal ultrasound presents a sensitivity of 79.06%, a specificity of 92.15%, a PPV and a NPV of 80.9% and of 91.2%, respectively. Excluding from the analysis lesions of the rectal ampulla, which cannot be adequately evaluated by means of ultrasound, the figures for sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV increase to 91.8, 92.1, 80.9 and 96.9% respectively. The univariate analysis showed that an age over 65 years and the presence of microcytosis are associated to a greater risk of colon cancer while after multivariate analysis only the presence of microcytosis resulted to be an independent predictive factor of cancer. Conclusions: abdominal ultrasound presents high sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV in the diagnosis of colon cancer. The combination of an ultrasonography and a rectoscopy permits us to rule out the presence of a colorectal carcinoma. In patients with microcytosis of 65 years and over, if there is strong clinical suspicion, a negative ultrasound may not be sufficient to rule out a colorectal neoplasia

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

No disponible

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

No disponible

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The preoperative diagnosis of submucosal lesions in the gut may be complicated. Conventional endoscopy does not allow to clearly establishing a diagnosis, and does not adequately assess lesion size. Furthermore, endoscopic biopsy is usually not diagnostic. Cytology as performed by means of fine-needle puncture does not have enough sensitivity and specificity to be considered the gold standard in the diagnosis of these lesions. We will now assess the usefulness of endoscopic ultrasonography in the study of submucosal digestive tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We have prospectively collected ultrasonographic studies from all the patients with submucosal tumors who were treated surgically. We assessed the sensitivity and specificity of this technique in the diagnosis of malignancy in said lesions, alongside factors that predict malignant behavior with the highest reliability. We also valued the reliability of ultrasound endoscopy in the assessment of lesion size and the wall layer where lesions are located. The results of histological studies were considered the gold standard. RESULTS: The average size of lesions as measured by ultrasound endoscopy was 37.42 mm, with no significant differences in surgical piece: 38.98 (p = 0.143). However, conventional endoscopy underestimates the size of lesions. Endoscopic ultrasonography was able to adequately establish the origin layer of lesions in all cases. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of ultrasound endoscopy in the diagnosis of malignancy were 89.5, 90.9, 89.5, and 90.9%, respectively. In the univariate analysis, the ultrasonographic characteristics associated with a diagnosis of malignancy included presence of ulceration (p = 0.043), size above 4 cm (p = 0.049), irregular edges of lesion (p = 0.0001), a heterogeneous ultrasonographic pattern (p = 0.002), and the presence of cystic areas above 2 mm (p = 0.012). In the multivariate analysis, the last three factors were considered independent predictive factors for malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic ultrasonography has a great sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of malignancy regarding submucosal lesions. The irregularity of lesion borders, a heterogeneous ultrasonographic pattern, and the presence of cystic areas above 2 mm in size were considered independent predictive factors for malignancy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introducción: el diagnóstico preoperatorio de las lesionessubmucosas del tubo digestivo puede ser complicado. La endoscopiaconvencional no permite establecer claramente un diagnósticoy no valora adecuadamente el tamaño de las lesiones. Además, labiopsia endoscópica no suele ser diagnóstica. La citología obtenidapor medio de la punción con aguja fina tampoco presenta lasuficiente sensibilidad y especificidad como para ser consideradacomo el patrón oro en el diagnóstico de estas lesiones. Evaluamosa continuación la utilidad de la ultrasonografía endoscópica en elestudio de los tumores submucosos digestivos.Material y métodos: hemos recogido de forma prospectivalos estudios ultrasonográficos de todos los pacientes con tumoressubmucosos tratados quirúrgicamente en nuestro centro. Se haevaluado la sensibilidad y especificidad de esta técnica en el diagnósticode malignidad de estas lesiones, así como los factores quecon mayor fiabilidad predicen el comportamiento maligno. Tambiénse valoró la fiabilidad de la ecoendoscopia en la valoracióndel tamaño y en identificar la capa de la pared en que se localizanlas lesiones. Los resultados del estudio anatomopatológico fueronconsiderados el patrón oro en el diagnóstico.Resultados: el tamaño medio de las lesiones medido por ecoendoscopiano presenta diferencias significativas con el de la piezaquirúrgica. Sin embargo, la endoscopia convencional infravalorael tamaño de las lesiones. La ultrasonografía endoscópica establecióadecuadamente la capa de origen de las lesiones en todos loscasos. La sensibilidad, especificidad, valor predictivo positivo y valorpredictivo negativo de la ecoendoscopia en el diagnóstico demalignidad eran del 89,5, 90,9, 89,5 y 90,9% respectivamente.En el análisis univariante las características endoscópicas y ultrasonográficasque se asociaban a un diagnóstico de malignidad eranla presencia de ulceración (p = 0,043), un tamaño mayor de 40mm (p = 0,049), la irregularidad de los bordes de la lesión (p =0,0001), un patrón ultrasonográfico heterogéneo (p = 0,002) y lapresencia de áreas quísticas mayores de 2 mm (p = 0,012). En elanálisis multivariante, todos excepto el tamaño y la presencia deulceración se consideraron factores independientes predictivos demalignidad.Conclusiones: la ultrasonografía endoscópica presenta unagran sensibilidad y especificidad en el diagnóstico de malignidadde las lesiones submucosas. La irregularidad de los bordes de la lesión,un patrón ultrasonográfico heterogéneo y la presencia deáreas quísticas mayores de 2 mm se consideraron factores independientespredictivos de malignidad

Introduction: the preoperative diagnosis of submucosal lesionsin the gut may be complicated. Conventional endoscopydoes not allow to clearly establishing a diagnosis, and does not adequatelyassess lesion size. Furthermore, endoscopic biopsy isusually not diagnostic. Cytology as performed by means of fineneedlepuncture does not have enough sensitivity and specificityto be considered the gold standard in the diagnosis of these lesions.We will now assess the usefulness of endoscopic ultrasonographyin the study of submucosal digestive tumors.Materials and methods: we have prospectively collected ultrasonographicstudies from all the patients with submucosal tumorswho were treated surgically. We assessed the sensitivity andspecificity of this technique in the diagnosis of malignancy in saidlesions, alongside factors that predict malignant behavior with thehighest reliability. We also valued the reliability of ultrasound endoscopyin the assessment of lesion size and the wall layer wherelesions are located. The results of histological studies were consideredthe gold standard.Results: the average size of lesions as measured by ultrasoundendoscopy was 37.42 mm, with no significant differences in surgicalpiece: 38.98 (p = 0.143). However, conventional endoscopyunderestimates the size of lesions. Endoscopic ultrasonographywas able to adequately establish the origin layer oflesions in all cases. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value,and negative predictive value of ultrasound endoscopy in thediagnosis of malignancy were 89.5, 90.9, 89.5, and 90.9%, respectively.In the univariate analysis, the ultrasonographic characteristicsassociated with a diagnosis of malignancy included presenceof ulceration (p = 0.043), size above 4 cm (p = 0.049),irregular edges of lesion (p = 0.0001), a heterogeneous ultrasonographicpattern (p = 0.002), and the presence of cystic areasabove 2 mm (p = 0.012). In the multivariate analysis, the lastthree factors were considered independent predictive factors formalignancy.Conclusions: endoscopic ultrasonography has a great sensitivityand specificity in the diagnosis of malignancy regarding submucosallesions. The irregularity of lesion borders, a heterogeneousultrasonographic pattern, and the presence of cystic areasabove 2 mm in size were considered independent predictive factorsfor malignancy

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The resection and histologic examination of the lesions is generally considered the treatment of choice in order to achieve diagnosis in gastrointestinal submucosal tumors. Moreover, the degree of malignancy of the tumor depends on certain features that can only be studied on the entire resected piece. METHODS: We revised the cases of patients who underwent endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal submucosal tumors in the period from 1997 through 2002. RESULTS: Fifty submucosal lesions were resected in 45 patients (64.4% men). Patient mean age was 55.31 years. Of the lesions, 52% were gastric tumors and 88% were located in the second layer. Mean size was 12.34 mm, and 54% were smaller than 10 mm. Resection with submucosal injection of saline solution and diluted adrenaline was performed on 46% of the lesions, and standard resection using polypectomy snare on 48%. Ligation was used in three cases. Resection was successful in 98% and major complications were observed in 4% (two cases of bleeding, endoscopically resolved). CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopic resection of submucosal tumors is a safe and efficient technique: It has few associated complications and allows diagnosis in all the cases and cure of the lesion in the great majority of cases.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Colon cancer is one of the main causes of cancer death. Diagnosis requires the examination of the entire large bowel by means of radiological or endoscopic techniques. Many patients suspect of colon cancer are referred for colonoscopy but nevertheless this suspicion is not confirmed after endoscopic examination. The objective of this study is the evaluation of the reliability of abdominal ultrasound in the diagnosis of these tumors. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We selected patients suspect of colon cancer referred to the endoscopy unit for a colonoscopy. An abdominal ultrasound was carried out on all patients prior to the endoscopy. Considering the endoscopic examination as a gold standard, the sensibility, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of the ultrasonography were evaluated. Likewise, a series of analytical and clinical parameters were evaluated, in an attempt to establish associated factors of a colon cancer. The statistical analysis was carried out by means of the statistical package SPSS 12.0 for Windows. RESULTS: 145 patients were included in the study (56.6% males) with an average 66.72 years of age (22-89). A cancer was diagnosed in 42 cases (28.9%). In the diagnosis of colon cancer, abdominal ultrasound presents a sensitivity of 79.06%, a specificity of 92.15%, a PPV and a NPV of 80.9% and of 91.2%, respectively. Excluding from the analysis lesions of the rectal ampulla, which cannot be adequately evaluated by means of ultrasound, the figures for sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV increase to 91.8, 92.1, 80.9 and 96.9% respectively. The univariate analysis showed that an age over 65 years and the presence of microcytosis are associated to a greater risk of colon cancer while after multivariate analysis only the presence of microcytosis resulted to be an independent predictive factor of cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal ultrasound presents high sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV in the diagnosis of colon cancer. The combination of an ultrasonography and a rectoscopy permits us to rule out the presence of a colorectal carcinoma. In patients with microcytosis of 65 years and over, if there is strong clinical suspicion, a negative ultrasound may not be sufficient to rule out a colorectal neoplasia.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introducción: los carcinoides son los tumores neuroendocrinos más frecuentes, representado el tracto digestivo una de sus localizaciones más habituales. La mayoría de las lesiones se localizan en áreas poco accesibles para la endoscopia convencional (intestino delgado y apéndice); los carcinoides localizados en el tracto gastroduodenal y en el intestino grueso pueden ser estudiados endoscópicamente; en estos casos, si se confirma una enfermedad localizada, el tratamiento local mediante resección endoscópica puede ser el tratamiento de elección. Dado que la ecoendoscopia se ha mostrado como la técnica de elección en el estudio de los tumores de crecimiento submucoso, la selección de los pacientes candidatos a una resección local segura y efectiva ha de basarse en esta técnica. Pacientes y método: se han seleccionado los pacientes con tumores carcinoides digestivos tratados endoscópicamente entre 1997 y 2002. Se consideraron subsidiarios de resección endoscópica aquellos pacientes con tumores menores de 10 mm, que respetan la muscular propia y con un estudio de extensión negativo. Los objetivos finales del estudio fueron la evaluación de la eficacia (resección completa) y seguridad (complicaciones) de la técnica. El seguimiento consistió en biopsias de la escara al mes y los 12 meses de la resección. Resultados: en el periodo referido hemos resecado endoscópicamente 24 tumores en 21 pacientes (edad media de 51,7 años; 71,5% varones). Las lesiones eran en su mayoría hallazgos incidentales en exploraciones indicadas por otros motivos. La resección se indicó en la mayoría de los casos por sospecha ecoendoscópica de tumor carcinoide. La ecoendoscopia además permitió establecer con claridad la capa de origen de la lesión y el tamaño de la misma. La extirpación se llevó a cabo en 13 casos (54,2%) mediante la técnica convencional de polipectomía con asa, en 9 casos (37,5%) asistida con inyección submucosa de suero salino y/o adrenalina y en 2 casos (8,3%) tras ligar la lesión con bandas elásticas. En todos los casos la resección fue completa, sin recidivas durante el seguimiento. En un único caso se produjo una complicación mayor: una hemorragia postpolipectomía que se controló endoscópicamente. Conclusiones: la resección endoscópica de los tumores carcinoides, en pacientes bien seleccionados, es una técnica segura y eficaz permitiendo una resección completa en todos los casos con escasas complicaciones. La ecoendoscopia es la técnica de elección para seleccionar los pacientes candidatos a resección endoscópica (AU)

No disponible

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding is a common disorder and may account for as many as 5% of all gastrointestinal hemorrhages. It is often caused by lesions in the small intestine, which were very complicated to examine prior to the advent of wireless capsule endoscopy. Here we present the case of a 31-year-old woman with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding as a complication of radiation enteritis, which was diagnosed only after she underwent an examination with wireless capsule endoscopy. This technique has proven to be far superior to other radiographic and endoscopic methods in diagnosing obscure gastrointestinal bleeding and pathologies of the small intestine in general.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Dieulafoy's disease is an uncommon but potentially significant cause of gastrointestinal bleeding caused by a large-caliber arterial vessel in the submucosa, which causes erosion and debilitation of the surrounding mucosa and may lead to massive gastrointestinal bleeding. Since endoscopy may prove insufficient, echoendoscopy may help in the diagnosis of this condition. Echoendoscopy may also help improve endoscopic management using mechanical techniques (hemoclips or band ligation) or a combination of thermal techniques and injection sclerotherapy, since this allows an accurate localization of the submucosal vessel. We present a case illustrating this approach by endoscopic ultrasonography, and describe the morphological substrate of this condition.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Liver segmental resection and liver transplantation are both treatments intended for healing liver cancer. An adequate selection of patients eligible for transplantation is crucial, since organs available for transplants are usually scarce. For this reason, awareness of the prognostic factors of relapse is of great importance. We present a comprehensive review of our series in order to better understand these prognostic factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We revised the cases of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent liver transplantation during the period 1994-2000, and present a detailed analysis of a series of variables which may be probably implicated in the appearance of relapse and which have an effect on survival. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 33 months, the mortality rate was 27.5% and relapse occurred in 18.75% of cases. No history of alcohol abuse, the number and size of the nodules, the presence of macro and microscopic vascular invasion, and pTNM stage T4 were all factors associated with a significantly increased risk of relapse (p<0.05). These factors and positive HCV were associated to decreased survival. After a multivariate analysis, the size of the nodules and the presence of macroscopic vascular invasion were considered the only independent risk factors for tumor relapse and post-transplantation relapse and mortality, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Macroscopic vascular invasion and tumor nodules larger than 5 cm are both independent risk factors of tumor relapse after transplantation. Nevertheless, only macroscopic vascular invasion seems to have a significant effect on survival.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Usually found in the gastrointestinal tract, carcinoids are the most frequent neuroendocrine tumors. Most of these lesions are located in areas that are difficult to access using conventional endoscopy (small intestine and appendix); carcinoid tumors found in the gastroduodenal tract and in the large intestine can be studied endoscopically; in these cases, if localized disease is confirmed, local treatment by endoscopic resection may be the treatment of choice. Since endoscopic ultrasonography has been shown to be the technique of choice for the study of tumors exhibiting submucosal growth, the selection of patients who are candidates for a safe and effective local resection should be based on this technique. PATIENTS AND METHOD: We selected patients with gastrointestinal carcinoid tumors who were endoscopically treated between 1997 and 2002. Those patients with tumors measuring less than 10 mm, which had not penetrated the muscularis propria, and those with localized disease were considered candidates for endoscopic resection. The endpoints of this study were to assess the effectiveness (complete resection) and safety (complications) of the technique. Follow-up consisted of eschar biopsies performed one month and twelve months after the resection. RESULTS: During the aforementioned period, we resected endoscopically 24 tumors in 21 patients (mean age: 51.7 years; 71.5% males). Most lesions were incidental discoveries made during examinations indicated for other reasons. Resection was indicated in most cases as a result of the suspected presence of a carcinoid tumor after endoscopic ultrasonography. Endoscopic ultrasonography also enabled us to clearly identify the layer where the lesion had originated, as well as the size of the lesion. The carcinoid tumor was removed in 13 cases (54.2%) by using the conventional snare polypectomy technique, in 9 cases (37.5%) assisted by a submucosal injection of saline solution and/or adrenaline, and in 2 cases (8.3%) after ligating the lesion with elastic bands. In all cases the resection was complete, with no recurrence during the follow-up period, and no major complications, except for a single case in which a post-polypectomy hemorrhage occurred that was endoscopically solved. CONCLUSIONS: In properly selected patients, the endoscopic resection of carcinoid tumors is a safe and effective technique that permits a complete resection in all cases with few complications. Endoscopic ultrasonography is the technique of choice for selecting the patients who are candidates for endoscopic resection.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTIONS: sigmoid volvulus is a relatively common cause of intestinal obstruction, particularly in the elderly and in patients with debilitating conditions. As the risks associated with surgical treatment of the sigmoid volvulus are in many cases too high, conservative (endoscopic) management is an option to be considered. MATERIAL AND METHODS: all emergency lower gastrointestinal endoscopies performed between January 1, 1996 and December 31, 2001 were review and, among these, the cases of diagnosis of sigmoid volvulus were selected. The results of the endoscopic management, percentage of recurrence, mortality rate, complications, surgical procedures etc were evaluated in the select cases. RESULTS: lower gastrointestinal endoscopy was diagnostic in all cases. Endoscopic management showed and overall efficacy of 87.5%. recurrence appeared in approximately 57% of the cases. Successful treatment was accomplished for the first episode in 25% of the cases. In case of recurrence, endoscopic management could be performed again with similar efficacy and safety. CONCLUSIONS: endoscopic reduction is a safe and successful technique for the management of emergency sigmoid volvulus, provided vascular compromise in the intestinal wall is ruled out. As recurrence is frequent, elective definitive surgery could be a treatment to consider. Endoscopic management could be the only choice treatment in the case of patients not it for surgery due to the very important risks associated with it their cases.

Asunto(s)