Agnieszka Świdnicka-Siergiejko

Application of cyanoacrylate in difficult-to-arrest acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency. Although endoscopic treatment is effective in controlling non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, in cases of persistent bleeding radiological or surgical interventions are required. Application of cyanoacrylate for treatment of difficult-to-arrest non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding is poorly investigated. We describe patients in whom cyanoacrylate for acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding was used to stop the bleeding after failure of conventional endoscopic treatment. Five patients were treated with cyanoacrylate application (injection and/or spraying) for persistent bleeding (duodenal ulcer in 3, gastric ulcer in 1 and gastric Dieulafoys lesion in 1) despite conventional endoscopic therapies. Hemostasis was achieved in all patients (100%). One patient (20%) developed recurrent bleeding 4 days after initial treatment. No complications or adverse events attributed to the cyanoacrylate application during the follow-up period of 57 days were observed. Application of cyanoacrylate is a safe and effective method to achieve immediate hemostasis when conventional endoscopic treatment is unsuccessful. This technique is easy to perform and should be considered in cases of patients with difficult-to-arrest acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Buried bumper syndrome: a rare complication of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

Feeding via percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the preferred form of alimentation when oral feeding is impossible. Although it is a relatively safe method, some complications may occur. One uncommon PEG complication is buried bumper syndrome. In this paper we report a case of buried bumper syndrome, successfully managed with PEG tube repositioning.

Esophageal pH and impedance reflux parameters in relation to body mass index, obesity related hormones and bariatric procedures

Introduction Obese patients have a higher risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but obesity‑related hormonal changes associated with GERD and the effects of bariatric therapy on reflux are unclear. Objectives The aim of the study was to assess reflux parameters in relation to bariatric therapy and hormonal changes in obese patients. Patients and methods This prospective observational study with a 1‑year follow‑up included 53 obese patients undergoing bariatric therapies. Esophageal pH and impedance monitoring tests were performed and circulating hormone levels were analyzed. Results Esophageal acid exposure time (%AET) and the number of refluxes correlated positively with body mass index. There were several significant, although weak, correlations of pH and impedance parameters with ghrelin and omentin levels. Patients with abnormal %AET had lower ghrelin levels and those with abnormal reflux number had lower omentin levels than patients with normal parameters. Although we observed certain changes including increased %AET and bolus clearance time (BCT) after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, a reduced BCT and number of refluxes after gastric band, and nonsignificant changes after intragastric balloon, the overall bariatric therapy did not significantly impact on the final GERD diagnosis. GERD before and after therapy was present in 42% of patients. De novo GERD developed in 17.8% of patients, while a similar percentage of patients with initial GERD had normal pH and impedance after therapy. Patients with de novo or persistent GERD had a similar percentage of weight loss as patients without GERD. Conclusions Bariatric therapy and percentage of weight loss do not significantly affect GERD. The observed hormonal changes alone do not fully explain the high prevalence of GERD in obese patients.

The added value of magnifying endoscopy in diagnosing patients with certain gastroesophageal reflux disease

PURPOSE In most cases gastroesophageal reflux disease proceeds without macroscopic erosions in the esophagus. We aimed to clarify if abnormalities detectable in magnifying endoscopy may offer additional diagnostic criteria for gastroesophageal reflux disease and to what histopathologic structures do they correspond. PATIENTS/METHODS Esophageal mucosa above and below Z-line was evaluated under x115 magnification in 67 gastroesophageal reflux disease patients (11 with erosive reflux disease, 28 with Barretts esophagus, 28 with nonerosive reflux disease) and in 12 patients without gastroesophageal reflux disease (negative control group). Features characteristic of gastroesophageal reflux disease were specified by comparing erosive reflux disease and Barretts esophagus patients with negative control group. Afterwards the presence of identified features were evaluated in nonerosive reflux disease group. Interobserver agreement in the recognition of the proposed criteria was rated. Biopsies collected from the mucosa above Z-line were evaluated histologically after hematoxylin and eosin staining. RESULTS Endoscopic lesions characteristic of gastroesophageal reflux disease were: microerosions, abnormal intrapapillary capillary loops, obscured palisade vessels, white points, big triangular indentations of Z-line and villous mucosa below Z-line. The presence of two or more of the above features indicated gastroesophageal reflux disease with 97% sensitivity and 75% specificity. Substantial interobserver agreement was achieved in evaluation of obscured palisade vessels, abnormal intrapapillary capillary loops and white points. Endoscopic lesions were correlated to histology. Lesions identified with magnifying endoscopy were helpful in discerning between negative control group and nonerosive reflux disease patients. CONCLUSIONS Magnifying endoscopy reveals abnormalities that can be used as additional endoscopic diagnostic criteria of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Comparison of the efficacy of two combined therapies for peptic ulcer bleeding: adrenaline injection plus haemoclipping versus adrenaline injection followed by bipolar electrocoagulation.

Introduction Peptic ulcer remains the most frequent cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Treatment of bleeding with simultaneous combination of two endoscopic techniques has proved to be more efficient than monotherapy. None of the published comparative studies of various contact coagulation modalities have confirmed the superiority of one of these techniques over the others. Aim To compare the therapeutic outcomes of the use of a device enabling both injection of adrenaline solution and bipolar electrocoagulation (A + BE) to those of combined adrenaline injection with mechanical therapy (haemostatic clips) (A + HC) in the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. Material and methods Fifty-two subjects with bleeding ulcers were assigned to the A + BE group, and 55 patients were treated with A + HC. Results Overall, treatment failed in 20 patients (20/107, 18.7%): in 10 individuals from the A + BE group (10/52; 18.2%) and in 10 individuals from the A + HC group (10/55; 19.2%) (p > 0.05). Primary haemostasis was not obtained in 7 patients (6.5%): in 4 patients in the A + BE group and in 3 patients in the A + HC group (p > 0.05). Ten individuals (9.3%) experienced recurrent bleeding during hospitalisation: 4 patients from the A + BE group and 6 patients from the A + HC group (p > 0.05). Finally, in 96.3% of the patients (n = 103) the endoscopic treatment proved efficient with regards to obtaining haemostasis during hospitalisation. Surgical intervention was required in 4 individuals (3.7%): 2 patients in the A + BE group and 2 patients treated with A + HC (p > 0.05). Three patients (2.8%) – all from the A + HC group – died during hospitalisation. No significant intergroup differences were documented with regards to the mean number of transfused blood units and the mean length of hospital stay. Conclusions The efficacy of combined endoscopic treatment of ulcer bleeding with a probe enabling simultaneous bipolar electrocoagulation and adrenaline injection seems comparable to the widely used dual technique of adrenaline injection and haemostatic clipping.