Fístula gastrocolocutánea: una infrecuente complicación de la gastrostomía endoscópica percutánea

Endoscopic percutaneous gastrostomy is a safe technique although with potential complications before which the clinician has to be on alert in order to early detect them even after a long period of normal functioning. Most of them represent minor problems. Gastrocolocutaneous fistula is a rare but severe complication favored by some risk factors such as previous post-surgical adherences, deformities of the spine, or excessive gastric inflation at the time of performing the technique. We present the case of a patient with PEG with this complication that occurred after the first tube replacement. Our goal was in two senses: on the one hand, to analyze the preventive aspects and basic guidelines for a safe PEG placement to minimize the risks; on the other hand, to alert on the possible presence of this entity to prevent a progressive nutritional impairment. This complication ought to be included in the differential diagnosis of the diarrhea syndrome in the patient carrying a PEG. The diagnostic techniques of choice are radiologic tests such as CT scan and contrast media administration through the tube. Surgical therapy should be reserved to patients with acute peritonitis in order to perform a new gastrostomy.

Application of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) to evaluate the whole gastrointestinal tract: a comparative study of single-camera and dual-camera analysis.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) was developed for the evaluation of colorectal pathology. In this study, our aim was to assess if a dual-camera analysis using CCE allows better evaluation of the whole gastrointestinal (GI) tract compared to a single-camera analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS We included 21 patients (12 males, mean age 56.20 years) submitted for a CCE examination. After standard colon preparation, the colon capsule endoscope (PillCam Colon™) was swallowed after reinitiation from its "sleep" mode. Four physicians performed the analysis: two reviewed both video streams at the same time (dual-camera analysis); one analyzed images from one side of the device ("camera 1"); and the other reviewed the opposite side ("camera 2"). We compared numbers of findings from different parts of the entire GI tract and level of agreement among reviewers. RESULTS A complete evaluation of the GI tract was possible in all patients. Dual-camera analysis provided 16% and 5% more findings compared to camera 1 and camera 2 analysis, respectively. Overall agreement was 62.7% (kappa = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.373-0.510). Esophageal (kappa = 0.611) and colorectal (kappa = 0.595) findings had a good level of agreement, while small bowel (kappa = 0.405) showed moderate agreement. CONCLUSION The use of dual-camera analysis with CCE for the evaluation of the GI tract is feasible and detects more abnormalities when compared with single-camera analysis.