No abstract

Resistant starch (RS) has been reported to improve steatosis as well as obesity. Type 4 resistant starch (RS4), a chemically modified starch, is particularly hard to digest and suggesting higher efficacy. However, because the effects of RS4 on steatosis are not yet fully understood, the effects of RS4 on steatosis were examined using a murine high‐fat diet model. Seven‐week‐old male mice were divided into three groups and fed a normal diet, a high‐fat diet (HFD), or a high‐fat diet with added RS (HFD + RS). Amylofiber SH® produced from acid‐treated corn starch was used as the dietary RS. At 22 weeks old, hepatic steatosis and short chain fatty acid (SCFA) content and gut microbiota in cecum stool samples were analyzed. The ratio of body weight to 7 weeks was significantly suppressed in the HFD + RS group compared to the HFD group (132.2 ± 1.4% vs. 167.2 ± 3.9%, p = 0.0076). Macroscopic and microscopic steatosis was also suppressed in the HFD + RS group. Analysis of cecum stool samples revealed elevated SCFA levels in the HFD + RS group compared with the HFD group. Metagenome analysis revealed that Bifidobacterium (17.9 ± 1.9% vs. 3.6 ± 0.7%, p = 0.0019) and Lactobacillus (14.8 ± 3.4% vs. 0.72 ± 0.23%, p = 0.0045), which degrade RS to SCFA, were more prevalent in the HFD + RS group than the HFD group. In conclusion, RS4 suppressed steatosis, and increased Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus, and SCFAs. RS4 may prevent steatosis by modulating the intestinal environment.

Background and Aim Esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is often technically difficult due to intraoperative body movements. The level of sedation can be increased to suppress body movements, but this may not be successful in all cases. Using local analgesics for submucosal injection during ESD may aid in conscious sedation. This study evaluated the feasibility of the lidocaine injection method (LIM) during esophageal ESD. Methods Twenty‐nine patients with superficial esophageal cancer were enrolled in this study at Osaka Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital, and 1% lidocaine + 0.4% hyaluronate sodium was injected into the submucosa underneath the lesion during esophageal ESD. The main outcome was body movements that disturbed the procedure. Results Most patients were male (90%), with a median age of 70 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 66–75 years old), and the median lesion size was 17 mm (IQR: 12–21 mm). The median injection volume of lidocaine was 70 mg (IQR: 55–79 mg). All lesions were successfully removed en bloc. In all cases, there were no body movements that disturbed the procedure. Regarding adverse events of sedation, five patients (17%) had hypotension, four patients (14%) had bradycardia, and seven patients (24%) had hypoxemia during ESD. Convulsions or arrhythmia as adverse events associated with lidocaine were not observed. Conclusions Esophageal ESD with LIM did not cause body movements that disturbed the procedure. LIM may help create a stable conscious sedation method for esophageal ESD.

No abstract