No abstract

Differences were observed between the previously published case series and the current results. There was an increase in incidentalomas and non-functioning tumors, but no variation in the overall survival rate. The differences with other case series (age, sex, and tumor location) were dependent on the country where the cases were compiled. The increase in tumors could be related to a higher number of diagnoses made through imaging studies and to the greater sensitivity of the devices employed.

Background and Objectives:The most accurate technology to detect and diagnose subepithelial tumors (SETs) is the endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) combined with puncture techniques, such as the endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) or the endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle biopsy. Going further in the improvement of the results of tumor samples obtained endoscopically to diagnose the SETs, the canalization technique guided by miniprobes (MPs) to obtain biopsies of SET could be an alternative to EUS-FNA. The objective of this study is to analyze the results of samples obtained by this procedure.Materials and Methods:A multicenter, retrospective study of a review of a database of 32 consecutive patients with a SET in the digestive tract, from 2000 to 2015 was conducted. All patients underwent EUS-performed by MP, to define the size, internal echostructure, and layer of origin of tumor. Once the echostructure was defined, it proceeded to the canalization technique to arrive to the tumor tissue.Results:The average diameter of SETs in this series (32 patients) was about 21.6±11 mm (range: 5–41 mm). The diagnostic accuracy was 28/32, 87.50% (Confidence interval 95%: 76.04%–98.99%), and there were no major complications. All procedures were performed on outpatients, none of which required additional hospitalization. The 50% of patients were operated or endoscopically resected and in all cases, the previous pathological diagnosis was confirmed.Conclusions:This is a feasible, safe, and effective procedure that allows to access to inside of SET to obtain deep biopsies. Tumor samples obtained by deep biopsy, with prior performing of the canalization technique guided by MP, were sufficient for histopathological and immunohistochemical diagnosis and similar to those obtained with other known methods (FNA Trucut, ProCore®, etc.). However, more prospective comparative studies with a larger number of patients and different specialists carrying out the procedure to reach a higher statistical significance are necessary.

Ram on Abad Belando, MBBS, Elena S anchez-Vizca ıno Mengual, MScConventional endoscopic sonography has allowed precise diagnostics without disturbances, and miniprobes can be easily introduced through the biopsy channel of the endoscope. Miniprobe endoscopic sonography has many benefits compared with conventional endoscopic sonography. Although there are well-known indications for miniprobe endoscopic sonography in endoscopic digestive tract assessment, there is still a need for this method to be widely spread among physicians and commonly used by most endoscopists. The aim of this series was to describe a multicenter retrospective experience with 1451 procedures using miniprobes, presenting examples and the applicability and usefulness of this technology in the daily activities of an endoscopy department.

BACKGROUND Dermal fillers for lip augmentation can be injected using various techniques. Although all seem to provide acceptable results, it is not clear which technique is safer, less painful, and provides greater patient comfort. OBJECTIVE To compare patients' self-reported pain intensity during the injection of hyaluronic acid dermal filler for lip augmentation, with 2 different techniques, anterograde versus retrograde. METHODS AND MATERIALS Prospective, single-center, within-subject, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. All subjects received injections in the lip with hyaluronic acid–based filler, each side using the anterograde or retrograde injection technique. An automated motorized injection device was used to ensure a homogeneous deposition flow of the product injected and reduce operator bias. Pain intensity was self-assessed using a 100-mm visual analog scale. Presence and severity of bruising were recorded. RESULTS Forty-four women (mean age 30.3 years) were randomized. Mean self-reported pain score was 53.1% lower with the anterograde technique than with the retrograde (p < .0001). The anterograde technique had lower rates of site reactions, showed a faster recovery time, and 68.2% of patients favored this technique. CONCLUSION This study demonstrated that the anterograde technique was less painful, and led to fewer bruising and site reactions than the retrograde technique when using an automated device. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I.