Truptesh H. Kothari
University of Rochester Medical Center
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Truptesh H. Kothari.
Endoscopy International Open | 2016
Christopher J. DiMaio; Jennifer M. Kolb; Petros C. Benias; Hiral N Shah Md; Shashin Shah Md; Oleh Haluszka; Jennifer L. Maranki; Kaveh Sharzehi; Eric Lam; Stuart R. Gordon; Sarah M. Hyder; Pavlos Z. Kaimakliotis; Satya Allaparthi; Frank G. Gress; Amrita Sethi; Ashish R. Shah; Jose Nieto; Vivek Kaul; Shivangi Kothari; Truptesh H. Kothari; Sammy Ho; Manhal Izzy; Neil Sharma; Rabindra R. Watson; V. Raman Muthusamy; Douglas K. Pleskow; Tyler M. Berzin; Mandeep Sawhney; Emad Aljahdi; Marvin Ryou
Background and aims: The ability to safely and effectively obtain sufficient tissue for pathologic evaluation by using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance remains a challenge. Novel designs in EUS needles may provide for improved ability to obtain such core biopsies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic yield of core biopsy specimens obtained using a novel EUS needle specifically designed to obtain core biopsies. Patients and methods: Multicenter retrospective review of all EUS-guided fine-needle biopsies obtained using a novel biopsy needle (SharkCore FNB needle, Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland). Data regarding patient demographics, lesion type/location, technical parameters, and diagnostic yield was obtained. Results: A total of 250 lesions were biopsied in 226 patients (Median age 66 years; 113 (50 %) male). Median size of all lesions (mm): 26 (2 – 150). Overall, a cytologic diagnosis was rendered in 81 % specimens with a median number of 3 passes. When rapid onsite cytologic evaluation (ROSE) was used, cytologic diagnostic yield was 126/149 (85 %) with a median number of 3 passes; without ROSE, cytologic diagnostic yield was 31/45 (69 %, P = 0.03) with a median number of 3 passes. Overall, a pathologic diagnosis was rendered in 130/147 (88 %) specimens with a median number of 2 passes. Pathologic diagnostic yield for specific lesion types: pancreas 70/81 (86 %), subepithelial lesion 13/15 (87 %), lymph node 26/28 (93 %). Ten patients (10/226, 4 %) experienced adverse events: 4 acute pancreatitis, 5 pain, 1 fever/cholangitis. Conclusions: Initial experience with a novel EUS core biopsy needle demonstrates excellent pathologic diagnostic yield with a minimum number of passes.
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology and Therapeutics | 2015
Christopher Steevens; Maisa I Abdalla; Truptesh H. Kothari; Vivek Kaul; Shivangi Kothari
Bleeding from duodenal varices is reported to be a catastrophic and often fatal event. Most of the cases in the literature involve patients with underlying cirrhosis. However, approximately one quarter of duodenal variceal bleeds is caused by extrahepatic portal hypertension and they represent a unique population given their lack of liver dysfunction. The authors present a case where a 61-year-old male with history of remote crush injury presented with bright red blood per rectum and was found to have bleeding from massive duodenal varices. Injection sclerotherapy with ethanolamine was performed and the patient experienced a favorable outcome with near resolution of his varices on endoscopic follow-up. The authors conclude that sclerotherapy is a reasonable first line therapy and review the literature surrounding the treatment of duodenal varices secondary to extrahepatic portal hypertension.
Endoscopy International Open | 2018
Harshit S. Khara; Truptesh H. Kothari; Amitpal S. Johal; Shivangi Kothari; Nina Ahuja; Ashok Bhanushali; Anil Kotru; Andrea Berger; Vivek Kaul; Seth A. Gross; Christopher J. DiMaio; William B. Hale; Rami Abbass; Marvin Ryou; Amrita Sethi; Brian G. Turner; Paul Fockens; David L. Diehl
Background and study aims The anatomical meaning of the terms “proximal” and “distal” in relation to the pancreaticobiliary anatomy can be confusing. We aimed to investigate practice patterns of use of the terms “proximal” and “distal” for pancreaticobiliary anatomy amongst various medical specialties. Materials and methods An online survey link to a normal pancreaticobiliary diagram was emailed to a multispecialty physician pool. Respondents were asked to label various parts of the common bile duct (CBD) and pancreatic duct (PD) using the terms “proximal,” “distal,” “not sure,” or “other.” Variability in use of these terms between specialties was assessed. Results We received 370 completed surveys from 182 gastroenterologists (49.2 %), 97 surgeons (26.2 %), 68 radiologists (18.4 %), and 23 other physicians (6.2 %). There was overall consensus in describing the upper/sub-hepatic CBD as “proximal CBD” (73.8 %, P = 0.1499) and the lower/pre-ampullary portion as “distal CBD” (84.6 %, P = 0.1821). Conclusions Although use of the terms “proximal” and “distal” is still very common to describe pancreaticobiliary anatomy, there is a discordance about its meaning, particularly for the PD. Use of descriptive terminology may be a more accurate alternative to prior ambiguous terminologies such as “proximal” or “distal” and can serve to improve communication and decrease the possibility of medical errors.
Family Medicine and Medical Science Research | 2014
Maisa I Abdalla; Chad Cornish; Sofia Taboada; Shivangi Kothari; Rushabh Doshi; Truptesh H. Kothari; Vivek Kaul
Adenosquamous carcinoma is a rare form of colorectal cancer. It is believed to be more aggressive and carries a poorer prognosis compared to the more typical colonic adenocarcinomas. Here we describe a case of primary cecaladenosquamous carcinoma invading into the terminal ileum along with a review of the literature.
Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology | 2012
Truptesh H. Kothari; Gregory B. Haber; Niket Sonpal; Nithin Karanth
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2015
Christopher J. DiMaio; Jennifer M. Kolb; Petros C. Benias; Oleh Haluszka; Jennifer L. Maranki; Kaveh Sharzehi; Jose Nieto; Douglas K. Pleskow; Tyler M. Berzin; Mandeep Sawhney; Emad Aljahdi; Vivek Kaul; Shivangi Kothari; Truptesh H. Kothari; Eric C. Lam; Clarence Wong; Neil Sharma; Sammy Ho; Manhal Izzy; Rabindra R. Watson; V. Raman Muthusamy; Frank G. Gress; Amrita Sethi; Ashish R. Shah; Marvin Ryou; Pavlos Z. Kaimakliotis; Satya Allaparthi; Stuart R. Gordon; Sarah M. Hyder; Parantap Gupta
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2018
Nicholas Bartell; Vivek Kaul; Truptesh H. Kothari; Krystle Bittner; Shivangi Kothari
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2018
Nicholas Bartell; Caren Taylor; Shivangi Kothari; Jose Aranez; Krystle Bittner; Truptesh H. Kothari; Vivek Kaul
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2018
Truptesh H. Kothari; Shivangi Kothari; Krystle Bittner; Asad Ullah; Vivek Kaul
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2018
Truptesh H. Kothari; Shivangi Kothari; Krystle Bittner; Vivek Kaul