The variables associated with gastroesophageal reflux (GER) after peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) are largely unknown. This study aimed to: 1) identify the prevalence of reflux esophagitis and asymptomatic GER in patients who underwent POEM, and 2) evaluate patient and intraprocedural variables associated with post-POEM GER. All patients who underwent POEM and subsequent objective testing for GER (pH study with or without upper gastrointestinal [GI] endoscopy) at seven tertiary academic centers (one Asian, two US, four European) were included. Patients were divided into two groups: 1) DeMeester score ≥ 14.72 (cases) and 2) DeMeester score of< 14.72 (controls). Asymptomatic GER was defined as a patient with a DeMeester score ≥ 14.72 who was not consuming proton pump inhibitor (PPI). A total of 282 patients (female 48.2 %, Caucasian 84.8 %; mean body mass index 24.1 kg/m) were included. Clinical success was achieved in 94.3 % of patients. GER evaluation was completed after a median follow-up of 12 months (interquartile range 10 - 24 months). A DeMeester score of ≥ 14.72 was seen in 57.8 % of patients. Multivariable analysis revealed female sex to be the only independent association (odds ratio 1.69, 95 % confidence interval 1.04 - 2.74) with post-POEM GER. No intraprocedural variables were associated with GER. Upper GI endoscopy was available in 233 patients, 54 (23.2 %) of whom were noted to have reflux esophagitis (majority Los Angeles Grade A or B). GER was asymptomatic in 60.1 %. Post-POEM GER was seen in the majority of patients. No intraprocedural variables were identified to allow for potential alteration in procedural technique.
Background and study aims Decisions concerning additional surgery after endoscopic resection of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) are difficult because preoperative prediction of lymph node metastasis (LNM) is problematic. We investigated whether artificial intelligence can predict LNM presence, thus minimizing the need for additional surgery. Patients and methods Data on 690 consecutive patients with T1 CRCs that were surgically resected in 2001 – 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. We divided patients into two groups according to date: data from 590 patients were used for machine learning for the artificial intelligence model, and the remaining 100 patients were included for model validation. The artificial intelligence model analyzed 45 clinicopathological factors and then predicted positivity or negativity for LNM. Operative specimens were used as the gold standard for the presence of LNM. The artificial intelligence model was validated by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for predicting LNM, and comparing these data with those of the American, European, and Japanese guidelines. Results Sensitivity was 100 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 72 % to 100 %) in all models. Specificity of the artificial intelligence model and the American, European, and Japanese guidelines was 66 % (95 %CI 56 % to 76 %), 44 % (95 %CI 34 % to 55 %), 0 % (95 %CI 0 % to 3 %), and 0 % (95 %CI 0 % to 3 %), respectively; and accuracy was 69 % (95 %CI 59 % to 78 %), 49 % (95 %CI 39 % to 59 %), 9 % (95 %CI 4 % to 16 %), and 9 % (95 %CI 4 % – 16 %), respectively. The rates of unnecessary additional surgery attributable to misdiagnosing LNM-negative patients as having LNM were: 77 % (95 %CI 62 % to 89 %) for the artificial intelligence model, and 85 % (95 %CI 73 % to 93 %; P < 0.001), 91 % (95 %CI 84 % to 96 %; P < 0.001), and 91 % (95 %CI 84 % to 96 %; P < 0.001) for the American, European, and Japanese guidelines, respectively. Conclusions Compared with current guidelines, artificial intelligence significantly reduced unnecessary additional surgery after endoscopic resection of T1 CRC without missing LNM positivity.
A retrospective analysis was conducted comparing open and percutaneous repair of ruptured Achilles tendon, over a 14-year period. One hundred and eight patients were identified; 70 underwent traditional open repair and 38 had a modified Ma & Griffith repair. The mean operating time with percutaneous repair was 28.5 minutes compared to 45.9 in the open group (p = <.0001). Comparable results were obtained in a subjective analysis of range of movement, stiffness, and power in both groups at time of discharge from clinic. In the open group there were four cases of rerupture (5.7%), four deep infections (4.7%), two palpable suture knots (2.9%), and one sural nerve lesion (1.4%). Complications with percutaneous repair included one rerupture (2.6%), five palpable suture knots (13.2%), four transient sural nerve lesions (10.5%), and no wound infections. There was no statistical significance between the two groups. The authors advocate percutaneous repair, in experienced hands, as a suitable alternative to traditional open techniques.
The long-term tumour biology of small rectal neuroendocrine tumours remains unclear. There is uncertain impact from bowel cancer screening programmes on rectal neuroendocrine tumour incidence, morbidity and mortality. Referral to neuroendocrine tumour centres for patients with locally advanced disease or metastatic disease is recommended.
Sentinel lymph node biopsy has become a standard staging tool in the surgical management of breast cancer. The positive impact of sentinel lymph node biopsy on postoperative negative outcomes in breast cancer patients, without compromising the oncological outcomes, is its major advantage. It has evolved over the last few decades and has proven its utility beyond early breast cancer. Its applicability and efficacy in patients with clinically positive axilla who have had a complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is being aggressively evaluated at present. This article discusses how sentinel lymph node biopsy has evolved and is becoming a useful tool in new clinical scenarios of breast cancer management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.