Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (the Apollo method): a new approach to obesity management

Background: Many obese patients cannot lose weight or reject conventional obesity management. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (the Apollo method) is a pioneering coadjuvant, interventionist technique for the integral management of obesity. Objectives: The goals of this study were to report safety and efficacy results obtained at 6 months in patients undergoing endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty. Material and methods: A prospective study was performed in 55 patients (13 males, 42 females) who were subjected to the Apollo technique; mean age was 43.5 years (range 25-60) and mean BMI was 37.7 kg/m² (range 30-48). All received multidisciplinary follow-up for weight loss. Weight changes and presence of complications were assessed. Through the endoscope a triangular pattern suture is performed consisting of approximately 3-6 transmural (mucosa to serosa) stitches, using a cinch device to bring them nearer and form a plication. Results: A total of 6-8 plications are used to provide a tubular or sleeve-shaped restriction to the gastric cavity. No major complications developed and patients were discharged at 24 hours following the procedure. Endoscopic and radiographic follow-up at 6 months post-procedure showed a well preserved tubular form to the stomach. After 6 months patients had lost 18.9 kg and 55.3% of excess weight. Conclusions: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty, together with dietary and psycho-behavioral changes, is a safe, effective technique in the coadjuvant management of obese patients.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of apixaban compared to low-molecular-weight heparins and vitamin k antagonists for treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism

Objective: Cost-effectiveness analysis of a 6-month treatment of apixaban (10 mg/12h, first 7 days; 5 mg/12h afterwards) for the treatment of the first event of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and prevention of recurrences, versus low-molecular-weight heparins/vitamin K antagonists treatment (LMWH/VKA). Material and methods: A lifetime Markov model with 13 health states was used for describing the course of the disease. Efficacy and safety data were obtained from AMPLIFY and AMPLIFY-EXT clinical trials; health outcomes were measured as life years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The chosen perspective of this analysis has been the Spanish National Health System (NHS). Drugs, management of VTE and complications costs were obtained from several Spanish data sources (€, 2014). A 3% discount rate was applied to health outcomes and costs. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed in order to assess the robustness of the results. Results: Apixaban was the most effective therapy with 7.182 LYG and 5.865 QALY, versus 7.160 LYG and 5.838 QALYs with LMWH/VKA. Furthermore, apixaban had a lower total cost (€13,374.70 vs €13,738.30). Probabilistic SA confirmed dominance of apixaban (led to better health outcomes with less associated costs) in 89% of the simulations. Conclusions: Apixaban 5 mg/12h versus LMWH/VKA was an efficient therapeutic strategy for the treatment and prevention of recurrences of VTE from the NHS perspective.

Management of the clinical issue of constipation with abdominal complaints in adults: a national survey of Primary Care physicians and gastroenterologists

Irritable bowel syndrome and functional constipation represent a relevant and common health issue. However, real-world clinical practice includes patients with constipation who may or may not have other abdominal complaints (pain, bloating, abdominal discomfort) with variable frequency. The goal of the present study was to obtain information on the workload entailed by patients with constipation and associated abdominal complaints, predominant clinical behaviors, education needs, and potential daily practice aids both in Primary Care and gastroenterology settings. The clinical behavior of doctors is generally similar at both levels, despite differences in healthcare approach: use of empiric therapies and clinically guided diagnostic tests, with some differences in colonoscopy use (not always directly accessible from Primary Care). Regarding perceptions, general support and osmotic laxatives are most valued by PC doctors, whereas osmotic laxatives, combined laxatives, and linaclotide are most valued by GE specialists. Furthermore, over half of respondents considered differentiating both diagnoses as challenging. Finally, considerable education needs are self-acknowledged at both levels, as is a demand for guidelines and protocols to help in managing this issue in clinical practice. A strength of this study is its providing a joint photograph of the medical approach and the perceptions of constipation with abdominal discomfort from a medical standpoint. Weaknesses include self-declaration (no formal validation) and a response rate potentially biased by professional motivation.