“保胆”理念正误

胆囊切除术是公认的胆囊良性疾病的治愈手段，国内外学术界对于手术适应证和手术时机已有明确共识。近年来，“保胆手术”治疗胆囊良性疾病颇受热议，一些医生将“保护胆囊”的学术观点等同于“保留胆囊”的手术技术，这种误解可能导致病人出现差异性的预后。因此，临床医师应明晰“保护胆囊”理念与“保胆手术”的差别，对胆囊良性疾病的诊疗原则有正确的理解和应用。     

Efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy for sessile serrated polyps ≥ 10 mm: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundCold snare polypectomy (CSP) is a promising technique for the removal of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) ≥ 10 mm. However, the efficacy and safety of this technique remain undetermined.AimsWe aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of CSP for SSPs ≥ 10 mm.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched up to January 2021.ResultsA total of 10 studies consisting of 1727 SSPs (range, 10–40 mm) from 1021 patients were included. The overall rates of technical success, adverse events (AEs) and residual SSPs were 100%, 0.7% and 2.9%, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the rates of technical success and AEs were comparable between CSP and cold endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) (99.9% vs. 100% and 1.3% vs. 0.5%, respectively), between the proximal and distal colon (100% vs. 99.9% and 0.3% vs. 0, respectively), and between polyps of 10–19 mm and ≥20 mm (99.8% vs. 100% and 0.9% vs. 0, respectively). However, subgroup analysis showed that the rate of residual SSPs was slightly lower in CSP compared with cold EMR (1.3% vs. 3.9%), as well as in polyps of 10–19 mm compared with those ≥20 mm (3.1% vs. 4.7%).ConclusionCSP was an effective and safe technique for removing SSPs ≥ 10 mm.     

腹腔镜经脐单一部位幽门环肌切开术治疗小儿先天性肥厚性幽门狭窄的临床效果研究

目的研究腹腔镜经脐单一部位幽门环肌切开术治疗小儿先天性肥厚性幽门狭窄的临床效果。方法100例小儿先天性肥厚性幽门狭窄患儿作为研究对象,按照随机方式分为观察组和对照组,每组50例。对照组采用腹腔镜幽门环肌切开术治疗,观察组采用腹腔镜经脐单一部位幽门环肌切开术治疗。观察记录患儿的手术结果及随访结果,并比较两组患儿手术时间、术后住院时间。结果手术过程顺利,100例患儿均成功完成手术,无一例中转开腹手术,无并发症发生。观察组患儿术后6 h将胃管取下,少量喂入温水后逐渐过渡到喂糖水、喂奶;对照组患儿术后24 h开始逐渐进食。患儿术后进行6个月的延续性随访,观察组患儿切口恢复美观,已经无法观察到切口瘢痕,两组患儿的生长发育均显示正常状态。观察组患儿手术时间(21.23±1.65)min及术后住院时间(5.58±1.98)d均显著短于对照组的(38.44±1.23)min、(9.67±1.22)d,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论先天性肥厚性幽门狭窄患儿采用腹腔镜经脐单一部位幽门环肌切开术治疗,手术效果良好,手术创伤小而且安全。     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性结石性胆囊炎的疗效

目的探讨分析对急性结石性胆囊炎患者采用腹腔镜胆囊切除术进行治疗的临床效果,以及对患者的胃肠功能和C反应蛋白所造成的影响。方法本次研究对象乃是我院肝胆外科于2017年4月-2019年4月期间收治的急性结石性胆囊炎患者62例,按照患者就诊的先后顺序对其进行平均分组,比较两组患者的术后肠鸣音恢复时间、肛门排气时间、排便时间、C反应蛋白水平以及并发症发生率。结果腹腔镜手术组患者的术后肠鸣音恢复时间(13.6±3.5)小时、肛门排气时间(16.5±2.7)小时以及排便时间(25.7±3.3)小时,均明显少于开腹式手术组患者(P<0.05);腹腔镜手术组患者的术后并发症发生率(6.45%)明显低于开腹式手术组患者(25.80%)(P<0.05);腹腔镜手术组患者的C反应蛋白水平为(10.4±2.5)mg/L,少于开腹式手术组患者(P<0.05)。结论根据本次研究的结果可以确认,对急性结石性胆囊炎患者采用腹腔镜胆囊切除术进行治疗能够取得更好的效果,可以促使患者的胃肠功能在术后更快的恢复,提高患者的C反应蛋白,从而有效避免患者出现并发症。     

Endoscopy-Related Bleeding and Thromboembolic Events in Patients on Direct Oral Anticoagulants or Vitamin K Antagonists

1. Download : Download high-res image (232KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Endoscopic ultrasonography and small‐bowel endoscopy: Present and future

Over the last decade, impressive technological advances have occurred in ultrasonography and small‐bowel endoscopy. Nowadays, endoscopic ultrasonography is an essential diagnostic tool and a therapeutic weapon for pancreatobiliary disorders. Capsule endoscopy and device‐assisted enteroscopy have quickly become the reference standard for the diagnosis of small‐bowel luminal diseases, thereby leading to radical changes in diagnostic and therapeutic pathways. We herein provide an up‐to‐date overview of the latest advances in endoscopic ultrasonography and small‐bowel endoscopy, focusing on the emerging paradigms and technological innovations that might improve clinical practice in the near future.     

Buried Bumper Syndrome: A common complication of levodopa intestinal infusion for Parkinson disease

BackgroundPercutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is required for Levodopa/Carbidopa Intestinal Gel (LCIG) delivery in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) as well as for enteral feeding in a variety of neurological disorders. Buried Bumper Syndrome (BBS) is a serious complication of PEG. The frequency of BBS in patients receiving LCIG treatment has never been reported.ObjectivesTo compare the frequency of BBS in patients on LCIG treatment or on enteral feeding over the past 12 years and identify possible risk factors.MethodsWe reviewed prospectively recorded data from 2009 to 2020 on two case-series: LCIG-treated PD patients and non-PD patients on enteral nutrition. We identified all BBS incidences. Patients’ characteristics, clinical manifestations, BBS management, possible risk factors and outcomes were analyzed.ResultsDuring the 12 years, 35 PD patients underwent PEG insertion for LCIG infusion, and 123 non-PD patients for nutritional support. There were eight cases of BBS in six PD patients (17.1%). Six of them were effectively managed without treatment discontinuation. Of the enteral feeding patients, only one developed BBS (0.8%) (p < 0.001). We identified inappropriate PEG site aftercare, weight gain, early onset PD, longer survival, treatment duration, dementia and PEG system design as potential risk factors for BBS development.ConclusionsBBS occurs more frequently in LCIG patients than in patients receiving enteral feeding. If detected early, it can be successfully managed, and serious sequalae or treatment discontinuation can be avoided. Regular endoscopic follow-up visits of LCIG-treated patients and increased awareness in patients and clinicians are recommended.     

Challenges in pathological assessment of endoscopic resections

Endoscopic resections (ERs) are performed for early (T1) cancers mostly of the esophagus, stomach and colorectum, offering a minimally invasive and tissue-preserving alternative to traditional surgical resection. Proper preparation and handling of these specimens is key to allow accurate histological assessment of parameters which will dictate the curative, or non-curative, nature of the procedure. Many histological features have been identified which correlate with risk of recurrence and/or nodal metastases, thereby dictating the need for further management. These include histological subtype of the lesion, grade, depth of invasion, margin status, tumor size, lymphovascular invasion and tumor budding [at least in the colon]. This review article will discuss the ideal specimen preparation and discuss each of these histological parameters in turn, as they pertain to the esophagus, stomach and colorectum, highlighting potential caveats and pitfalls to be aware of when reporting these specimens.