The sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions is strongly correlated with tumor size. Sensitivity and accuracy decrease significantly for tumors that are smaller than 1 cm.

Abbreviations: CT, computer-aided tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; EUS-FNA, endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value Background and Aims: The diagnosis of intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy of is difficult, especially when no primary lesion has been identified. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA cytology in patients with enlarged intra-abdominal lymph nodes of unknown etiology. Patient and Methods: 147 patients with abdominal lymphadenopathy on imaging in whom EUS-FNA was performed with a 22-gauge needle. Performance characteristics of EUS-FNA including the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy were compared between the 2 groups. Results: AThe location of the enlarged lymph nodes was the celiac axis (8.2%), peri-gastric (34%), peri-pancreatic (25.2%), peri-portal (27.9%), and other intra-abdominal locations (4.8%). The median number of EUS-FNA passes was 5. The final diagnosis were lymphoma in (n=27), metastatic adenocarcinoma (n=44) patients, other miscellaneous malignancies (n=22) and benign disease (n=54). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EUS-FNA were 89.7, 98.3, and 93.5% respectively. A false positive FNA result was present in only 1 case (0.7%); false negative FNA results were present in eight cases (5.8%). Lymph node morphologic features of roundness, echogenicity, and homogeneity on EUS were not a predictor of lymph node malignancy. Conclusion:In a retrospective cohort trial, EUS-FNA was found to be highly accurate and safe in diagnosing patients with intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy of unknown etiology.

Zonisamide is a new antiepileptic drug with multiple mechanisms of action and a favourable pharmacokinetic profile. Preliminary data suggest that zonisamide may be effective in migraine prophylaxis. We evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of zonisamide for migraine prophylaxis in refractory patients. We reviewed the charts of adult patients with International Headache Society-defined episodic migraine (EM) or with transformed migraine (TM) according to the Silberstein- Lipton criteria, who had been treated with zonisamide at our out-patient clinic for at least 60 days. Demographic data, zonisamide dosage and duration of treatment were collected and analysed. Headache frequency, attack duration, headache severity and headache-related disability before and after treatment initiation with zonisamide were compared. Thirty-three patients were included in the study (average age 43.9 ± 8.4 years; 23 (70%) with TM and 10 (30%) with EM). The patients had failed an average of 6.2 migraine prophylactic drugs prior to zonisamide. The average zonisamide daily dose was 337.9 ± 146.3 mg and the average duration of treatment was 186.4 ± 174.0 days. The average number of days with headache per month was reduced in the entire study population from 20.7 ± 9.5 before zonisamide treatment to 18.0 ± 11.3 after its initiation ( P = 0.06) [in TM from 24.7 ± 7.3 to 21.0 ± 10.7 ( P = 0.06); in EM from 11.6 ± 7.6 to 11.0 ± 9.7 ( P = NS)]. No significant changes in other headache parameters were found. Fourteen patients (42.4%) reported adverse events (AEs), the most common of which was fatigue. Most patients (12/14, 85.7%) rated AEs as mild or moderate. In this group of refractory migraine patients, zonisamide therapy did not result in a statistically significant beneficial effect on headache or on associated symptoms.

Brief Reports should be submitted online to www.editorialmanager.com/ amsurg. (See details online under ''Instructions for Authors''.) They should be no more than 4 double-spaced pages with no Abstract or sub-headings, with a maximum of four (4) references. If figures are included, they should be limited to two (2). The cost of printing color figures is the responsibility of the author.In general, authors of case reports should use the Brief Report format.

Background and Aim. Spiral enteroscopy (SE) is a new small bowel endoscopic technique. Our aim is to review the diagnostic and therapeutic yield, safety of SE, and the predictive role of prior capsule endoscopy (CE) at an academic center. Methods. A retrospective review of patients undergoing SE after prior CE between 2008 and 2013 was performed. Capsule location index (CLI) was defined as the fraction of total small bowel transit time when the lesion was seen on CE. Results. A total of 174 SEs were performed: antegrade (147) and retrograde (27). Abnormalities on SE were detected in 65% patients. The procedure was safe in patients with surgically altered bowel anatomy (n = 12). The diagnostic yield of antegrade SE decreased with increasing CLI range. The diagnostic yield of retrograde SE decreased on decreasing CLI range. A CLI cutoff of 0.6 was derived that determined the initial route of SE. Vascular ectasias seen on CE were detected in 83% cases on SE; p < 0.01. Conclusions. SE is safe with a high diagnostic and therapeutic yield. CLI is predictive of the success of SE and determines the best route of SE. The type of small bowel pathology targeted by SE may affect its utility and yield.