Igor Laufer

The effect of ursodiol on the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy of gallstones: The dornier national biliary lithotripsy study

BACKGROUND In the treatment of gallstones with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy, the bile acid ursodiol is administered to dissolve the gallstone fragments. We designed our study to determine the value of administering this agent. METHODS At 10 centers, 600 symptomatic patients with three or fewer radiolucent gallstones 5 to 30 mm in diameter, as visualized by oral cholecystography, were randomly assigned to receive ursodiol or placebo for six months, starting one week before lithotripsy. RESULTS The stones were fragmented in 97 percent of all patients, and the fragments were less than or equal to 5 mm in diameter in 46.8 percent. On the basis of an intention-to-treat analysis of all 600 patients, 21 percent receiving ursodiol and 9 percent receiving placebo (P less than 0.0001) had gallbladders that were free of stones after six months. Among those with completely radiolucent solitary stones less than 20 mm in diameter, 35 percent of the patients receiving ursodiol and 18 percent of those receiving placebo (P less than 0.001) were free of stones after six months. Biliary pain, usually mild, occurred in 73 percent of all patients but in only 13 percent of those who were free of stones after three and six months (P less than 0.01). There were few adverse events. Only diarrhea occurred with a significantly different frequency in the two groups: 32.6 percent were affected in the ursodiol group, as compared with 24.7 percent in the placebo group (P less than 0.04). Severe biliary pain occurred in 1.5 percent of all patients, acute cholecystitis in 1.0 percent, and acute pancreatitis in 1.5 percent; endoscopic sphincterotomy was performed in 0.5 percent, and cholecystectomy in 2.5 percent. CONCLUSIONS Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy with ursodiol was more effective than lithotripsy alone for the treatment of symptomatic gallstones, and equally safe. Treatment was more effective for solitary than multiple stones, radiolucent than slightly calcified stones, and smaller than larger stones.

The Radiological Demonstraction of Colorectal Polyps Undetected by Endoscopy

In a consecutive series of 800 routine double contrast studies of the colon, 119 polyps were diagnosed radiologically in 78 patients. Follow-up studies were available in 46 patients with 72 polyps. Ultimately, 56 of these polyps were confirmed (55 by endoscopy and 1 by repeat radiology). Six of these polyps had been missed on the initial endoscopic examination. The missed polyps are usually located in the rectum behind a valve of Houston or in any area of the colon where there is sharp angulation. Radiologists and endoscopists should be aware of these as potential endoscopic blind spots. These cases illustrate the importance of higg quality radiological study of the colon and the complementary nature of radiology and endoscopy in the detection of colorectal polyps.

The Diagnostic Accuracy of Barium Studies of the Stomach and Duodenum—Correlation with Endoscopy

Radiologic and endoscopic diagnoses were compared in 240 patients. In 175 patients examined by a standard barium contrast technique there were 39 radiological errors (22%). The most common causes of error were failure to detect an abnormality on the radiograph and prominent mucosal folds which could either mask or simulate small lesions. In 65 patients examined by a formal double contrast technique using effervescent pills and a thick barium suspension, there were 4 radiological errors (6%). In addition, superficial gastric erosions were demonstrated in 7 patients. Double contrast radiography appears to offer the potential for significant improvements in diagnostic accuracy.

Epiphrenic Diverticulum: Clinical and Radiographic Findings in 27 Patients

The purpose of our study was to reassess the clinical and radiographic findings in patients with epiphrenic diverticula. A search of our radiology files revealed 27 patients with epiphrenic diverticula within 10 cm of the gastroesophageal junction. Medical records and radiographic reports and images were reviewed to determine the clinical and radiographic findings. Twenty-three patients had a solitary epiphrenic diverticulum, three had two diverticula, and one had three diverticula. The diverticula arose from the right side of the distal esophagus in 19 patients and the left side in eight. The diverticula had a mean width of 4.4 cm and a mean height of 3.7 cm. Other findings included prolonged retention of barium in the diverticula in 19 patients, preferential filling in 11, retained debris in 5, regurgitation of barium or debris in 5, compression of the esophagus in 5, pseudodiverticula formation in 3, and ulceration in 1. We found a significant correlation between the width of the diverticulum and preferential filling with barium. Twelve patients had abnormal esophageal motility, with diffuse esophageal spasm in two. Seventeen patients had symptoms attributable to the diverticulum (dysphagia in 11 and/or reflux symptoms in 12). We also found a significant correlation between the size or preferential filling of the diverticulum and the presence of symptoms. Conversely, we found no correlation between esophageal dysmotility and the presence of symptoms. Our experience suggests that the development of symptoms in patients with epiphrenic diverticula is more likely to be related to the morphologic features of the diverticula than to underlying esophageal motility disorders.

A simple method for routine double-contrast study of the upper gastrointestinal tract.

A technique for routine double-contrast study of the stomach and duodenum is presented. It requires neither nasogastric intubation nor hypnotic drugs. The authors emphasize the technical factors and maneuvers which result in optimal mucosal coating and unobscured double-contrast views of the stomach and duodenum. The radiological error rate was 7% in 190 patients; a marked improvement over results produced by the standard barium study. In a consecutive series of 1,000 patients superficial gastric erosions were demonstrated in 19 patients. It is recommended that such a technique be applied to the routine radiological study of the upper gastrointestinal tract.

Assessment of the Accuracy of Double Contrast Gastroduodenal Radiology

The report presents an analysis of routine double contrast gastroduodenal radiology based on our experience with 1500 consecutive examinations. The value of this technique is illustrated by the demonstration of subtle abnormalities such as erosions, linear ulcers, and ulcer scars which are usually not demonstrated by the standard barium study. Two hundred and twenty-five of these patients have also been examined by endoscopy and radiological errors were found in 7%. This represents a marked improvement over the results obtained with the standard method. In the last 128 patients, a confidence level ranging from 3 (certainty) to 1 (uncertain) was assigned to the radiological diagnosis before endoscopy. It was found that the majority of radiological errors occurred in the few studies given the lowest confidence level. These findings indicate that the double contrast study of the stomach and duodenum can be a very accurate examination and that endoscopy can be applied more selectively to patients with inconclusive double contrast studies.

The Small-Caliber Esophagus: Radiographic Sign of Idiopathic Eosinophilic Esophagitis

PURPOSE To evaluate a small-caliber esophagus at barium esophagography with idiopathic eosinophilic esophagitis (IEE) and determine if there is a useful threshold diameter for suggesting this diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS The institutional review board approved this retrospective study and waived informed consent. This study was HIPAA compliant. A search of the radiology database (by using the search term small-caliber esophagus) revealed 10 patients with a small-caliber esophagus at barium esophagography who had IEE (defined as more than 20 eosinophils per high-power field in endoscopic biopsy specimens). Images were reviewed to characterize findings and determine the length of narrowing. Luminal diameters were measured at three levels for nine patients and nine control subjects, and mean diameter, range, and standard deviation were determined at each level. An analysis of variance test was performed to determine whether the difference between the range of mean thoracic esophageal diameters in patients with IEE versus that in control subjects was significant. RESULTS All 10 patients had long-segment but variable-length narrowing of the thoracic esophagus (mean length, 15.4 cm) with tapered margins. The mean diameter at the aortic arch, carina, and one vertebral body above the gastroesophageal junction was 13.9, 14.3, and 15.1 mm, respectively, for patients with small-caliber esophagus versus 20.2, 30.3, and 28.7 mm for control subjects. The mean overall diameter was 14.7 mm for patients with small-caliber esophagus versus 26.3 mm for control subjects. In the nine patients in whom the luminal diameter was measured, the mean thoracic esophageal diameter was 20 mm or less; all nine control subjects had a mean thoracic esophageal diameter greater than 20 mm. The difference in the range of mean thoracic esophageal diameters between these two groups was highly significant (P < .0001), so 20 mm was a useful threshold diameter for suggesting this diagnosis. CONCLUSION The small-caliber esophagus of IEE is characterized at barium esophagography by long-segment but variable-length narrowing of the thoracic esophagus, with a mean length of 15.4 cm, a diameter of 20 mm or less, smooth contours, and tapered margins.

Transverse folds in the human esophagus.

Fine transverse folds can be seen by double contrast technique in the human esophagus which are similar to those seen regularly in the feline esophagus. These folds are transient in nature and possibly represent contraction of the muscularis mucosae. This fold pattern can be seen in patients with gastroesophageal reflux and in those with no symptoms of esophageal disease. The marginal serration should not be mistaken for diffuse ulceration on barium filled views of the esophagus. Distortion of interruption of the normal fold pattern can be seen in patients with superficial ulceration due to reflux esophagitis or other invasive mucosal lesions. Although the pathophysiologic significance of this phenomenon is uncertain, the demonstration and recognition of these folds allows for better definition of mucosal surface abnormalities.

Detection of reflux esophagitis on double-contrast esophagrams and endoscopy using the histologic findings as the gold standard

Abstract The purpose of our study was to determine the accuracy of double-contrast barium studies and endoscopy for detecting reflux esophagitis, using the endoscopic biopsy findings as the gold standard. A review of radiology, endoscopy, and pathology files showed 37 patients with reflux symptoms who underwent double-contrast barium studies and endoscopy with biopsy specimens from the esophagus. The radiographic images were reviewed in a blinded fashion and correlated with the endoscopic and histologic findings to determine the radiographic and endoscopic accuracies for detecting reflux esophagitis, using the endoscopic biopsy specimens as the gold standard. Double-contrast barium studies and endoscopy had low but comparable accuracies for detecting reflux esophagitis, with sensitivities of 35% and 39%, specificities of 79% and 71%, positive predictive values of 73% and 69%, and negative predictive values of 42% and 41%, respectively. When mucosa granularity was evaluated as an individual sign of esophagitis on double-contrast studies, this finding had a sensitivity of 35%, a specificity of 93%, a positive predictive value of 89%, and a negative predictive value of 46% for detecting reflux esophagitis. Our experience suggests that double-contrast barium studies and endoscopy have limited ability to detect reflux esophagitis, in particular mild esophagitis, when using the histologic findings as the gold standard. When radiographic abnormalities are detected, however, mucosal granularity is the single best sign of reflux esophagitis on double-contrast studies.

Gastroesophageal reflux: comparison of barium studies with 24-h pH monitoring

OBJECTIVE To determine the correlation between massive gastroesophageal reflux (GER) on barium studies and pathologic acid reflux on 24-h pH monitoring. METHODS A search of hospital records from January 1997 to January 2001 revealed 28 patients who underwent both barium studies and 24-h pH monitoring. The radiologic reports were reviewed to determine the presence and degree of GER. Patients with reflux to or above the thoracic inlet either spontaneously or with provocative maneuvers in the recumbent position were classified as having massive reflux, whereas the remaining patients with reflux below the thoracic inlet or no reflux comprised the control group. The pH monitoring reports were also reviewed to determine if pathologic acid reflux was present in the recumbent position. The findings on these studies were then compared to determine the frequency of pathologic acid reflux in the recumbent position on pH monitoring in patients with massive reflux on barium studies compared with the control group. RESULTS Massive GER was observed on barium studies in 11 (39%) of the 28 patients and reflux below the thoracic inlet or no reflux in the remaining 17 patients (61%) who comprised the control group. All 11 patients (100%) with massive reflux on barium studies had pathologic acid reflux on pH monitoring in the recumbent position compared with six (35%) of 17 patients in the control group (P = 0.0009). The pH in the distal esophagus on pH monitoring was less than 4.0 for 13.1% of the recumbent period for patients with massive GER on barium studies compared with 6.2% of the recumbent period for the control group (P = 0.0076). CONCLUSION Although 24-h pH monitoring remains the gold standard for the detection of GER, our experience suggests that patients with massive reflux on barium studies are so likely to have pathologic acid reflux in the recumbent position that these individuals can be further evaluated and treated for their gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) without need for pH monitoring.