Barrett’s esophagus: Review of natural history and comparative efficacy of endoscopic and surgical therapies

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Progression to cancer typically occurs in a stepwise fashion through worsening dysplasia and ultimately, invasive neoplasia. Established EAC with deep involvement of the esophageal wall and/or metastatic disease is invariably associated with poor long-term survival rates. This guides the rationale of surveillance of Barrett’s in an attempt to treat lesions at an earlier, and potentially curative stage. The last two decades have seen a paradigm shift in management of Barrett’s with rapid expansion in the role of endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for management of dysplastic and early neoplastic BE, and there have been substantial changes to international consensus guidelines for management of early BE based on evolving evidence. This review aims to assist the physician in the therapeutic decision-making process with patients by comprehensive review and summary of literature surrounding natural history of Barrett’s by histological stage, and the effectiveness of interventions in attenuating the risk posed by its natural history. Key findings were as follows. Non-dysplastic Barrett’s is associated with extremely low risk of progression, and interventions cannot be justified. The annual risk of cancer progression in low grade dysplasia is between 1%-3%; EET can be offered though evidence for its benefit remains confined to highly select settings. High-grade dysplasia progresses to cancer in 5%-10% per year; EET is similarly effective to and less morbid than surgery and should be routinely performed for this indication. Risk of nodal metastases in intramucosal cancer is 2%-4%, which is comparable to operative mortality rate, so EET is usually preferred. Submucosal cancer is associated with nodal metastases in 14%-41% hence surgery remains standard of care, except for select situations.     

Is amiodarone still a reasonable therapeutic option for rhythm control in atrial fibrillation?

Amiodarone is the most potent antiarrhythmic drug available and is commonly prescribed to treat and prevent not only life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias but also atrial fibrillation (AF). The latest European Society of Cardiology AF guidelines state that amiodarone is recommended for long-term rhythm control in all AF patients but that other antiarrhythmic drugs should be considered first whenever possible, due to its extracardiac toxicity. In patients without significant or with only minimal structural heart disease, amiodarone is not listed as a possibility in their therapeutic scheme. Still, amiodarone is widely and liberally used, and is the most prescribed antiarrhythmic drug for patients with AF despite its high toxicity profile. Non-cardiovascular death was more frequent with amiodarone treatment than with a rate control strategy in AFFIRM, while meta-analyses suggest an association between amiodarone use in patients without structural heart disease and increased non-cardiovascular mortality. Severe or even fatal outcomes due to amiodarone may occur years after treatment initiation and are often not acknowledged by the prescribing physician, who may no longer be following the patient. The lack of widely accepted diagnostic criteria and symptom definitions may lead to underestimation of the incidence of severe side effects and of its toxicity. Unlike the underestimated risk of toxicity with amiodarone, severe complications associated with catheter ablation are usually directly ascribed to the treatment even by non-medical personnel, possibly resulting in overestimation of risks. This brief review will address the issue of amiodarone overuse and the frequent underestimation of its toxicity, while suggesting scenarios in which its use is entirely reasonable, and compare it with catheter ablation.     

多元化联合教学模式在超声引导下疼痛介入治疗中的应用

目的探讨多元化联合教学模式在超声引导下疼痛介入治疗教学中的应用效果。方法选择2018年1月至2020年12月在北京大学第三医院疼痛科进修的30名医师作为研究对象,将其分为对照组与观察组;对照组采用常规教学模式;观察组采用多元化联合教学模式,比较两组医师技能考核成绩、教学质量评分和满意度评分。结果观察组医师技能考核成绩优良率为93.3%,高于对照组的73.3%(P<0.05);观察组医师对基础理论知识掌握、临床思维能力的提高、学习兴趣的激发、疾病诊治能力的提高4个方面的评分均高于对照组(P<0.01)。结论多元化联合教学模式可促进超声引导下疼痛介入治疗技能的提高,有利于提高学员的综合临床能力。     

Outcomes of Fluoroscopy-Guided Percutaneous High Ligation of the Great Saphenous Vein Combined With Foam Sclerotherapy for Symptomatic Great Saphenous Veins

PurposeTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous high ligation (FPHL) combined with fluoroscopy-guided foam sclerotherapy (FGFS) to treat varicose veins of the great saphenous veins (GSVs).Materials and MethodsThis was a retrospective study of 113 patients (mean age, 62.1 ± 10.8 years; 60 men) with varicose veins of the GSVs (133 limbs) that were treated with FPHL combined with FGFS between April 1 and October 31, 2019. Demographic and clinical data were collected from these patients before the FPHL procedure, after which FGFS was performed. The preterminal GSV was ligated percutaneously by a percutaneously-positioned polypropylene ligature under fluoroscopic guidance. The outcome of ligation was confirmed by venography. Then, foam sclerotherapy was performed under fluoroscopy. At 1-year follow-up, GSV occlusion was evaluated by ultrasound. The venous clinical severity scores (VCSSs) were compared between the preoperative and 1-year follow-up periods.ResultsThe technical success rate was 100% (133 limbs). Complete 12-month follow-up was available for 112 limbs (84.2%) and 103 of these limbs (92.0%) remained occluded during this period. The VCSS improved from 4.71 ± 2.15 to 0.74 ± 0.60 (V = 6328, P < .001). During follow-up, there were 16 limbs with thrombophlebitis and 38 limbs with saphenous junction pain; these events were alleviated within 2 weeks of the procedure. There was no deep venous thrombosis or other severe adverse events.ConclusionsFPHL combined with FGFS to treat varicose veins in the GSVs achieved an occlusion rate of 92% and improved the clinical symptoms within 1 year; this minimally-invasive procedure was safe and effective.     

The impact of additional margin coagulation with radiofrequency in liver resections with subcentimetric margin: can we improve the oncological results? A propensity score matching study

BackgroundWhereas the usefulness of radiofrequency (RF) energy as haemostatic method in liver surgery has become well established in the last decades, its intentional application on resection margins with the aim of reducing local recurrence is still debatable. Our goal was to compare the impact of an additional application of RF energy on the top of the resection surface, namely additional margin coagulation (AMC), on local recurrence (LR) when subjected to a subcentimeter margin.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 185 patients out of a whole cohort of 283 patients who underwent radical hepatic resection with subcentimetric margin. After propensity score adjustment, patients were classified into two balanced groups according to whether RF was applied or not.ResultsNo significant differences were observed within groups in baseline characteristics after PSM adjustment. The LR rate was significantly higher in the Control than AMC Group: 12 patients (14.5%) vs. 4 patients (4.8%) (p = 0.039). The estimated 1, 3, and 5-year LR-free survival rates of patients in the Control and AMC Group were: 93.5%, 86.0%, 81.0% and 98.8%, 97.2%, 91.9%, respectively (p = 0.049). Univariate Cox analyses indicated that the use of the RF applicator was significantly associated with lower LR (HR = 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.093–0.906, p = 0.033). The Control Group showed smaller coagulation widths than the AMC group (p < 0.001).ConclusionsAn additional application of RF on the top of the resection surface is associated with less local hepatic recurrence than the use of conventional techniques.     

Utilization of and Outcomes Associated with Intravascular Ultrasound during Deep Venous Stent Placement among Medicare Beneficiaries

PurposeTo evaluate temporal trends, practice variation, and associated outcomes with the use of intravascular ultrasound (US) during deep venous stent placement among Medicare beneficiaries.Materials and MethodsAll lower extremity deep venous stent placement procedures performed between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019 among Medicare beneficiaries were included. Temporal trends in intravascular US use were stratified by procedural setting and physician specialty. The primary outcome was a composite of 12-month all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, or repeat target vessel intervention. The secondary outcome was a composite of 12-month stent thrombosis, embolization, or restenosis.ResultsAmong the 20,984 deep venous interventions performed during the study period, 15,184 (72.4%) utilized intravascular US. Moderate growth in intravascular US use was observed during the study period in all clinical settings. There was a variation in the use of intravascular US among all operators (median, 77.3% of cases; interquartile range, 20.0%–99.2%). In weighted analyses, intravascular US use during deep venous stent placement was associated with a lower risk of both the primary (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69–0.76; P < .001) and secondary (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.27–0.39; P < .001) composite end points.ConclusionsIntravascular US is frequently used during deep venous stent placement among Medicare beneficiaries, with further increase in use from 2017 to 2019. The utilization of intravascular US as part of a procedural strategy was associated with a lower cumulative incidence of adverse outcomes after the procedure, including venous stent thrombosis and embolization.     

Microwave Ablation versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Stage I Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

PurposeTo assess the cost effectiveness of microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with inoperable stage I non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Materials and MethodsA literature search was performed in MEDLINE with broad search clusters. A decision-analytic model was constructed over a 5-year period. The model incorporated treatment-related complications and long-term recurrence. All clinical parameters were derived from the literature with preference to long-term prospective trials. A healthcare payers’ perspective was adopted. Outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) extracted from prior studies and U.S. dollars from Medicare reimbursements and prior studies. Base case calculations, probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, and multiple 1- and 2-way sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsMWA yielded a health benefit of 2.31 QALYs at a cost of $195,331, whereas SBRT yielded a health benefit of 2.33 QALYs at a cost of $225,271. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $1,480,597/QALY, indicating that MWA is the more cost-effective strategy. The conclusion remains unchanged in probabilistic sensitivity analysis with MWA being the optimal cost strategy in 99.84% simulations. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that MWA remains cost effective when its annual recurrence risk is <18.4% averaged over 5 years, when the SBRT annual recurrence risk is >1.44% averaged over 5 years, or when MWA is at least $7,500 cheaper than SBRT.ConclusionsMWA appears to be more cost effective than SBRT for patients with inoperable stage I NSCLC.