Sédation par propofol administrée par un non-anesthésiste pour l'endoscopie digestive [Administration of propofol by non-anesthesiologists for digestive endoscopy].

Propofol is progressively replacing benzodiazepines for sedation during endoscopy, even when the sedation is administered by non-anesthesiologists. Propofol ensures a more rapid induction of sedation and recovery and, in certain conditions, higher patient satisfaction and improved quality of endoscopic examination. Specific training is required to use this drug. Patients at risk of complications should be identified before the endoscopy to optimize patient management with an anesthesiologist. After sedation, psychomotor recovery is faster with propofol compared to traditional sedation agents but tasks requiring particular attention (eg, driving) should be avoided. It is important to advise patients of these restrictions in advance.

Próteses no tubo digestivo: evolução e aplicações no século XXI

RESUMO: A utilização das próteses metálicas auto-expansíveis é um tratamento paliativo e definitivo muito eficaz em doentes com obstrução maligna coló-retal e gastroduodenal. Este tratamento está associado a taxas de morbilidade e de intervenção adicional aceitáveis. O recurso a próteses expansíveis em doenças benignas pode constituir uma opção terapêutica válida. As próteses biodegradáveis e as próteses metálicas totalmente cobertas podem ser utilizadas, com eficácia aceitável, num grupo de doentes com estenóses refractárias do esófago e para os quais não estão disponíveis grandes opções de tratamento. As próteses metálicas totalmente cobertas podem ser um tratamento de excepção em situações benignas biliares onde anteriormente a cirurgia era a única opção disponível. As próteses metálicas são a opção de escolha no tratamento paliativo do colangiocarcinoma hilar, independentemente do tipo de lesão. Em doentes com estenoses do tipo II de Bismuth a colocação bilateral de próteses metálicas, sempre que tecnicamente possíveis, deve ser recomendada pois está associada a uma maior patência das próteses e a uma menor taxa de reintervenção.

Serum Zn Levels in Dysphagic Patients Who Underwent Endoscopic Gastrostomy for Long Term Enteral Nutrition

Background and aims: Dysphagic patients who underwent endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) usually present protein-energy malnutrition, but little is known about micronutrient malnutrition. The aim of the present study was the evaluation of serum zinc in patients who underwent endoscopic gastrostomy and its relationship with serum proteins, whole blood zinc, and the nature of underlying disorder. Methods: From patients that underwent gastrostomy a blood sample was obtained minutes before the procedure. Serum and whole blood zinc was evaluated using Wavelength Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy. Serum albumin and transferrin were evaluated. Patients were studied as a whole and divided into two groups: head and neck cancer (HNC) and neurological dysphagia (ND). Results: The study involved 32 patients (22 males), aged 43-88 years: HNC = 15, ND = 17. Most (30/32) had low serum zinc, 17/32 presented normal values of whole blood zinc. Only two, with traumatic brain injury, presented normal serum zinc. Serum zinc levels showed no differences between HNC and ND patients. There was no association between serum zinc and serum albumin or transferrin. There was no association between serum and whole blood zinc. Conclusions: Patients had low serum zinc when gastrostomy was performed, similar in HNC and ND, being related with prolonged fasting and unrelated with the underlying disease. Decrease serum zinc was unrelated with low serum proteins. Serum zinc was more sensitive than whole blood zinc for identifying reduced zinc intake. Teams taking care of PEG-patients should include zinc evaluation as part of the nutritional assessment, or include systematic dietary zinc supply.

NOTES et trocart unique: révolution chirurgicale ou marketing [NOTES and single port access: surgical or marketing revolution?].

Promising new technologies are emerging in digestive surgery: Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES) and Single Port Access Surgery. They both aim to limit the surgical morbidity by decreasing the number of parietal accesses. The feasibility in human is obviously demonstrated, but numerous issues remain concerning the safety of these techniques. Furthermore, the expected advantages are not clearly demonstrated until now in the literature. In the future, it will be advisable to standardize techniques, in order to allow large clinical studies and to limit the potential complications of these approaches.

Maladie coeliaque: état des lieux [An update on celiac disease].

Celiac disease is a well-known entity in pediatrics and pediatric gastroenterology that is now also frequently encountered in the adult population. Apart from typical symptoms, celiac disease can present with a wide range of manifestations that are sometimes atypical, scarce or purely extraintestinal. Serologic and genetic testing are useful tools in case of low clinical probability in the early diagnostic algorithm. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy remains the mainstay to confirm the diagnosis especially in atypical clinical presentations. Complications are rare but can be severe. Although gluten-free diet often leads to complete recovery, compliance is not universal and alternative treatment strategies are under investigation.

Underutilization of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Efforts to reduce costs in health care may raise concerns about underuse of medical procedures. This study prospectively assessed underuse of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in a cohort of patients in whom we have recently published data on overuse of endoscopy. METHODS: Underuse was identified by formal necessity criteria for endoscopy, obtained by an explicit panel process. Outpatients were consecutively included in two clinical settings. Setting A consisted of 20 primary care physicians and 7215 patient visits that occurred within 1 month. Setting B consisted of 920 visits that occurred during 3 weeks at an outpatient clinic. RESULTS: During these 8135 visits, 611 patients complained of upper digestive symptoms; 63 of them underwent endoscopy. Underuse was identified in 72 patients (11.8%). The two clinical situations mainly responsible for underuse of endoscopy were uninvestigated peptic symptoms resistant to treatment and dysphagia. At first follow-up, 29 of the patients with initial underuse still fulfilled criteria of necessity (underuse rate, 4.7%). One-year follow-up showed underuse of endoscopy in 5 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective evidence shows that underuse of a medical procedure exists. The estimated overuse and underuse of endoscopy in this cohort were approximately equal (5%). Improving quality of care will require reductions of both overuse and underuse of medical procedures.

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.

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.

Overuse of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in a country with open-access endoscopy: a prospective study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: This prospective observational study was aimed at evaluating the appropriateness of use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) in primary care in a country with open access to and high availability of the procedure. METHODS: Outpatients were consecutively included in two clinical settings: Setting A (20 primary care physicians during 4 weeks) and B (university-based outpatient clinic during 3 weeks). In patients undergoing UGE, appropriateness of referral was judged by explicit Swiss criteria developed by the RAND/UCLA panel method. RESULTS: Patient visits (8135) were assessed. Six hundred eleven patients complained of upper gastrointestinal symptoms. Physicians decided to perform UGE in 63 of these patients. Twenty-five (40%) of the endoscopies were rated appropriate, 7 (11%) equivocal, and 31 (49%) inappropriate. Overuse of UGE occurred in 5.1% (setting A: 4.7%; setting B:6.5%; p = 0.39) of the patients who presented with upper gastrointestinal symptoms. The decision to perform UGE in previously untreated dyspeptic patients was the most common clinical situation resulting in overuse. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate use of UGE is high in Switzerland. However, to better reflect primary care decision making, overuse should be related not only to patients referred for a medical test, but also to the number of patients who complain of the symptoms that would be investigated by the procedure.

Combined written and oral information prior to gastrointestinal endoscopy compared with oral information alone: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how to most effectively deliver relevant information to patients scheduled for endoscopy. METHODS: To assess the effects of combined written and oral information, compared with oral information alone on the quality of information before endoscopy and the level of anxiety. We designed a prospective study in two Swiss teaching hospitals which enrolled consecutive patients scheduled for endoscopy over a three-month period. Patients were randomized either to receiving, along with the appointment notice, an explanatory leaflet about the upcoming examination, or to oral information delivered by each patient's doctor. Evaluation of quality of information was rated on scales between 0 (none received) and 5 (excellent). The analysis of outcome variables was performed on the basis of intention to treat-analysis. Multivariate analysis of predictors of information scores was performed by linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 718 eligible patients 577 (80%) returned their questionnaire. Patients who received written leaflets (N = 278) rated the quality of information they received higher than those informed verbally (N = 299), for all 8 quality-of-information items. Differences were significant regarding information about the risks of the procedure (3.24 versus 2.26, p < 0.001), how to prepare for the procedure (3.56 versus 3.23, p = 0.036), what to expect after the procedure (2.99 versus 2.59, p < 0.001), and the 8 quality-of-information items (3.35 versus 3.02, p = 0.002). The two groups reported similar levels of anxiety before procedure (p = 0.66), pain during procedure (p = 0.20), tolerability throughout the procedure (p = 0.76), problems after the procedure (p = 0.22), and overall rating of the procedure between poor and excellent (p = 0.82). CONCLUSION: Written information led to more favourable assessments of the quality of information and had no impact on patient anxiety nor on the overall assessment of the endoscopy. Because structured and comprehensive written information is perceived as beneficial by patients, gastroenterologists should clearly explain to their patients the risks, benefits and alternatives of endoscopic procedures. Trial registration: Current Controlled trial number: ISRCTN34382782.

Is the diagnostic yield of upper GI endoscopy improved by the use of explicit panel-based appropriateness criteria?

BACKGROUND: Increasing the appropriateness of use of upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is important to improve quality of care while at the same time containing costs. This study explored whether detailed explicit appropriateness criteria significantly improve the diagnostic yield of upper GI endoscopy. METHODS: Consecutive patients referred for upper GI endoscopy at 6 centers (1 university hospital, 2 district hospitals, 3 gastroenterology practices) were prospectively included over a 6-month period. After controlling for disease presentation and patient characteristics, the relationship between the appropriateness of upper GI endoscopy, as assessed by explicit Swiss criteria developed by the RAND/UCLA panel method, and the presence of relevant endoscopic lesions was analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 2088 patients (60% outpatients, 57% men) were included. Analysis was restricted to the 1681 patients referred for diagnostic upper GI endoscopy. Forty-six percent of upper GI endoscopies were judged to be appropriate, 15% uncertain, and 39% inappropriate by the explicit criteria. No cancer was found in upper GI endoscopies judged to be inappropriate. Upper GI endoscopies judged appropriate or uncertain yielded significantly more relevant lesions (60%) than did those judged to be inappropriate (37%; odds ratio 2.6: 95% CI [2.2, 3.2]). In multivariate analyses, the diagnostic yield of upper GI endoscopy was significantly influenced by appropriateness, patient gender and age, treatment setting, and symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Upper GI endoscopies performed for appropriate indications resulted in detecting significantly more clinically relevant lesions than did those performed for inappropriate indications. In addition, no upper GI endoscopy that resulted in a diagnosis of cancer was judged to be inappropriate. The use of such criteria improves patient selection for upper GI endoscopy and can thus contribute to efforts aimed at enhancing the quality and efficiency of care. (Gastrointest Endosc 2000;52:333-41).

Preoperative upper gastrointestinal testing can help predicting long-term outcome after gastric banding for morbid obesity.

BACKGROUND: Gastric banding (GB) is one of the most popular bariatric procedures for morbid obesity. Apart from causing weight loss by alimentary restriction, it can interfere with functions of the esophagus and upper stomach. The aim of this study was to evaluate if the results of extensive preoperative upper GI testing were correlated with long-term outcome and complications after GB. METHODS: Using a prospectively maintained computerized database including all the patients undergoing bariatric operations in both our hospitals, we performed a retrospective analysis of the patients who underwent complete upper gastrointestinal (GI) testing (endoscopy, pH monitoring, and manometry) before GB. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-four patients underwent complete testing before GB. Abnormal pH monitoring (increased total reflux time, increased diurnal reflux time, increased number of reflux episodes) predicted the development of complications and especially pouch dilatation and food intolerance. The mean De Meester score was higher among patients who developed complications than in the remaining ones (25.4 vs 17.7, P=0.03). High lower esophageal sphincter pressure also predicted progressive long-term food intolerance. Endoscopic findings were not predictive of the long-term outcome. CONCLUSIONS: There is some association between the function of the upper digestive tract and long-term complications after gastric banding. Abnormal pH monitoring predicts overall long-term complications, especially food intolerance with or without reflux, and pouch dilatation, and a high lower esophageal sphincter pressure predicts long-term food intolerance. Extended upper gastrointestinal testing with endoscopy, 24-h pH monitoring, and esophageal manometry is probably worthwhile in selecting patients for gastric banding.

Appropriate treatment for Crohn's disease: methodology and summary results of a multidisciplinary international expert panel approach--EPACT.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: For many therapeutic decisions in Crohn's disease (CD), high-grade evidence is lacking. To assist clinical decision-making, explicit panel-based appropriateness criteria were developed by an international, multidisciplinary expert panel. METHODS: 10 gastroenterologists, 3 surgeons and 2 general practitioners from 12 European countries assessed the appropriateness of therapy for CD using the RAND Appropriateness Method. Their assessment was based on the study of a recent literature review of the subject, combined with their own expert clinical judgment. Panelists rated clinical indications and treatment options using a 9-point scale (1 = extremely inappropriate; 9 = extremely appropriate). These scenarios were then discussed in detail at the panel meeting and re-rated. Median ratings and disagreement were used to aggregate ratings into three assessment categories: appropriate (A), uncertain (U) and inappropriate (I). RESULTS: 569 specific indications were rated, dealing with 9 clinical presentations: mild/moderate luminal CD (n = 104), severe CD (n = 126), steroid-dependent CD (n = 25), steroid-refractory CD (n = 37), fistulizing CD (n = 49), fibrostenotic CD (n = 35), maintenance of medical remission of CD (n = 84), maintenance of surgical remission (n = 78), drug safety in pregnancy (n = 24) and use of infliximab (n = 7). Overall, 146 indications (26%) were judged appropriate, 129 (23%) uncertain and 294 (52%) inappropriate. Frank disagreement was low (14% overall) with the greatest disagreement (54% of scenarios) being observed for treatment of steroid-refractory disease. CONCLUSIONS: Detailed explicit appropriateness criteria for the appropriate use of therapy for CD were developed for the first time by a European expert panel. Disease location, severity and previous treatments were the main factors taken into account. User-friendly access to EPACT criteria is available via an Internet site, www.epact.ch, allowing prospective evaluation and improvement of appropriateness of current CD therapy.

Hémorragie digestive aiguë [Acute gastrointestinal bleeding]

Gastrointestinal bleeding is among the major clinical challenges for the gastroenterologists and the initial approach is very complex. For a big part of bleeding lesions, it is important to perform an endoscopic hemostatis after the introduction of an intravenous treatment (that has to be started as soon as there is a clinical suspicion of an upper gastrointestinal bleeding). The significant progresses made during the last years have allowed firstly to see the entire small bowel mucosa (video capsule) and secondly new treatments have successfully replaced surgical interventions.

Role of wireless capsule endoscopy in inflammatory bowel

Capsule endoscopy (CE) offers state-of-the-art imaging of the small bowel. In Crohn's disease its clinical role is still uncertain. This report analyses the usefulness of CE in patients with suspected Cronh's disease, in patients with established Crohn's disease (when assessing severity, occult gastrointestinal bleeding and/or as a guide to therapy), in patients with inflammatory bowel disease unclassified (IBDU), and in individuals with ulcerative colitis. The first item in this group is the most important although there is no strong evidence to establish the position of CE in the diagnostic workup. In patients with established Crohn's disease, recently developed activity scores are promising tools for an accurate assessment of severity. As a guide to therapy, CE should be focused on patients with unexplained symptoms when other investigations are inconclusive. In postoperative Crohn's Disease, international consensus recommended considering CE only if ileocolonoscopy is contraindicated or unsuccessful. In the case of IBDU, studies have shown a significant proportion of patients reclassified with Crohn's disease. In this setting, CE could have a role determining small bowel involvement. The role of CE in ulcerative colitis is limited. Some authors advocate CE before colectomy for refractory cases in order to exclude Crohn's disease. In summary, CE offers a new horizon in inflammatory bowel disease, and a better knowledge of mucosal abnormalities that could offer a paradigm shift: changing from symptom-based disease activity estimation to direct mucosal healing monitoring. Nevertheless, randomized controlled studies are still needed to provide stronger evidence in this setting.