No abstract

-Context -Morbidly obese patients have an increased risk for nonalcoholic fat liver disease. Its severe form, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis may cause liver fibrosis. The diagnosis of advanced fibrosis has great value during the pre operative evaluation for bariatric surgery. Currently, liver biopsy is the gold standard for diagnosis of liver fibrosis. Objective -To evaluate the nonalcoholic fat liver disease fibrosis score in morbidly obese patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in our population. Methods -One hundred fifty-eight morbidly obese patients that had undergone bariatric surgery were included. Age, body mass index, hyperglycemia, platelet count, albumin and AST/ALT ratio were applied to the score formula. Scores above 0.676 were indicative of advanced liver fibrosis and scores under -1,455 absence of advanced liver fibrosis. These scores were compared to liver biopsy findings. Results -The presence of advanced fibrosis could be diagnosed with good accuracy, with a positive predictive value of 83.7%. The score had a higher accuracy to exclude advanced fibrosis with a negative predictive value of 97%. Twenty-five patients (16%) had scores between the cutoffs points and were identified as indeterminate. The score sensibility and specificity was 83% and 97% respectively. Conclusions -The nonalcoholic fat liver disease fibrosis score has high accuracy to identify and exclude advanced liver fibrosis in morbidly obese patients subjected to bariatric surgery.

BackgroundColonoscopy is the most frequent exam used to evaluate colonic mucosa, allowing the diagnosis and treatment of many diseases. The appropriate bowel preparation is indispensable for the realization of colonoscopy. Therefore, it is necessary the use of laxative medications, preferentially by oral administration.AimTo compare two medications used in bowel preparation in adult patients going to ambulatory colonoscopy and to analyze the patients' profile.MethodsA double-blind prospective study with 200 patients, randomized in two groups: one that received polyethilene glycol and another that received lactulose. The patients answered to questionnaires to data compilation, as tolerance, symptoms and complications related to preparation. Besides, it was also evaluated the prepare efficacy related to the presence of fecal residue.ResultsIntestinal habit alterations and abdominal pain were the main reasons to realize the exams and hypertension was the most prevalent comorbidity. Ten percent of the ones who received lactulose didn't get to finish the preparation and 50% considered the taste "bad, but tolerable". The most common subjective symptom after the medication was nausea, especially after lactulose. During the exam, most of the patients who used lactulose had a "light discomfort" and the ones who used polyethilene glycol considered the discomfort as "tolerable". The quality of the preparation was good in 75%, undependable of the medication that was used.ConclusionPolyethilene glycol was more tolerable when compared to lactulose, without difference on the quality of the preparation.

Background: The double balloon enteroscopy is an important method for the endoscopic approach of the small bowel that provides diagnosis and therapy of this segment’s disorders, with low complication rate. Aim: Analysis of patients undergoing double balloon enteroscopy. The specific objectives were to establish the indications for this method, evaluate the findings by the double balloon enteroscopy, analyze the therapeutic options and the complications of the procedure. Methods: It is a retrospective analysis of 65 patients who underwent double balloon enteroscopy. Results: Sixty-five procedures were performed in 50 patients, 63.1% were women and 36.9% were men. The mean age was 50.94 years. The main indication it was gastrointestinal bleeding, followed by abdominal pain and Crohn’s disease. Most procedures were considered normal. Polyps were the most prevalent finding, followed by angioectasias and duodenitis. In 49.2% of the cases, one or more therapeutic procedures were performed, (biopsy was the most prevalent). There was only one case of acute pancreatitis, which was treated clinically. Conclusion: The enteroscopy is good and safe method for the evaluation of the small bowel, and its main indications are gastrointestinal bleeding and abdominal pain. It has low complications rates and reduces the necessity of surgery.

OBJETIVO: Comparar a segurança e a eficácia do propofol com a do midazolam na sedação profunda durante colonoscopias. MÉTODOS: Sessenta e seis pacientes foram submetidos à colonoscopias e estudados prospectivamente. Um total de 50 pacientes recebeu 3,25 mg.kg-1 de peso de propofol. No grupo controle de 16 pacientes foi administrado 2,05 mg.kg-1 de peso de midazolam. A dose de manutenção foi titulada de acordo com a necessidade. Os parâmetros cardiovasculares e respiratórios observados foram a saturação de oxigênio, pressão arterial sistólica e diastólica e frequência cardíaca. Após o procedimento foi realizado um questionário sobre intercorrências como dor, desconforto e satisfação após a colonoscopia, utilizando uma escala visual de zero a dez. Foi aplicado o teste t de Student para a análise estatística. RESULTADOS: A amostra foi similar com relação às variáveis idade, peso, sexo e condição física. Houve diferença estatística significativa para os parâmetros saturação de oxigênio do sangue e pressão arterial sistólica entre os dois grupos. Não houve diferença estatística significativa para os parâmetros pressão arterial diastólica e pulso. Apesar das diferenças nos parâmetros cardiovasculares e respiratórios, não houve repercussões hemodinâmicas significativas. Não houve diferença estatística no parâmetro dor e satisfação. Os pacientes que apresentaram agitação (25%) no grupo midazolam, relataram mais desconforto (p=0,038). CONCLUSÃO: As variações nos parâmetros cardiovasculares e respiratórios, mesmo com diferenças significativas entre os grupos, não causaram repercussões clínicas significativas nos dois grupos, caracterizando a segurança na sedação profunda. A sedação com midazolam ou propofol não está associada a níveis de dor e satisfação diferentes entre os dois grupos. O grupo midazolan referiu significativamente mais desconforto que o grupo propofol.