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.     

Validation of the Modena bleeding score in endoscopic sinus surgery

IntroductionThe Modena bleeding score is a categorical rating scale that allows the assessment of the surgical field in relation to bleeding during endoscopic surgery. It has recently been presented and validated in the field of endoscopic ear surgery by the present authors. The Modena bleeding score provides five grades for rating the surgical field during endoscopic procedures (from grade 1 ? no bleeding to grade 5 ? bleeding that prevents every surgical procedure except those dedicated to bleeding control).ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to validate the Modena bleeding score in the setting of endoscopic sinus surgery.MethodsFifteen three-minute videos of endoscopic sinus surgery procedures (each containing three bleeding situations) were evaluated by 15 specialists, using the Modena bleeding score. Intra and inter-rater reliability were assessed, and the clinical validity of the Modena bleeding score was calculated using a referent standard.ResultsThe data analysis showed an intra-rater reliability ranging from 0.6336 to 0.861. The inter-rater reliability ranged from 0.676 to 0.844. The clinical validity was α = 0.70; confidence limits: 0.64 ? 0.75, corresponding to substantial agreement.ConclusionThe Modena bleeding score is an effective method to score bleeding during endoscopic sinus surgery. Its application in future research could facilitate the performance and efficacy assessment of surgical techniques, materials or devices aimed to bleeding control during endoscopic sinus surgery.     

99mTc-DTPA核素肾动态显像评价主动脉夹层患者术后肾功能受损研究

目的:应用99mTc-DTPA肾动脉显像评价Stanford不同分型主动脉夹层患者术后左、右侧肾功能及总体肾功能受损程度,帮助临床制定进一步的治疗方案,改善患者预后。方法:回顾性分析2018年3月8日至2019年7月19日,在本院核医学科行99mTc-DTPA肾动态显像的主动脉夹层术后患者48例,评价患者双肾血流灌注、总肾小球滤过率(GFR)和分肾的GFR,比较Stanford主动脉夹层A型(简称A型)患者和主动脉夹层B型(简称B型)患者之间总肾功能及分肾功能,血肌酐、血尿素氮及血尿酸水平的差异。结果:B型患者术后总GFR低于A型患者(67.5 vs.80.6 m L/min,P<0.05),其中以左肾功能受损为著(30.9 vs.40.3 m L/min,P<0.05),差异有统计学意义。结论:肾动态显像对主动脉夹层术后患者早期评价肾功能有重要价值。主动脉夹层B型患者GFR较A型减低,且左侧肾GFR减低更明显,临床可以早期采取干预措施,改善主动脉夹层患者预后。