The two schemes were equal regarding enteric cleansing and completion of the procedure. Therefore, 2 l seems to be an adequate preparation for capsule endoscopy.

Varices, diffuse changes of mucosa with inflammatory-like appearance, and angiodysplasias and/or spider angiomas are detected more often in patients with PHT than in controls, and probably constitute the endoscopic characteristics of PHE. CE of the SB added a significant number of likely important findings to those detected by conventional endoscopic techniques for the clinical management of patients with PHT and anemia.

No abstract

Although a wide variety of infectious agents have been implicated in the aetiology of acute pancreatitis, their true incidence is unknown because they coexist quite often with other noninfectious causes. Acute herpes simplex viral pancreatitis is a rarely encountered entity in the literature. We report a patient who developed acute pancreatitis and hepatitis in association with herpes simplex virus infection as well as cholestatic syndrome because of compression of the intrapancreatic part of the common bile duct by the oedematous pancreatic head. Herpes simplex virus infection, although a rare entity, should be included in the conditions causing acute pancreatitis, when common noninfectious factors have been excluded and hepatic inflammation coexists. Diagnostically, a combination of serum amylase or lipase elevation, more than three times over the upper normal limits, as well as serologic evidence of the infectious agent should exist. Dilatation of the biliary tree is not invariably compatible with a biliary cause of acute pancreatitis.

Three methods of esophagoscopy are available until now: sedated conventional endoscopy, unsedated ultrathin endoscopy, and esophageal capsule endoscopy. The three methods carry comparable diagnostic accuracy and different complication rates. Although all of them have been found well accepted from patients, no comparative study comprising the three techniques has been published. The aim of this study was to compare the three methods of esophagoscopy regarding tolerability, satisfaction, and acceptance. Twenty patients with large esophageal varices and 10 with gastroesophageal reflux disease were prospectively included. All patients underwent consecutively sedated conventional endoscopy, unsedated ultrathin endoscopy, and esophageal capsule endoscopy. After each procedure, patients completed a seven-item questionnaire. The total positive attitude of patients toward all methods was high. However, statistical analysis revealed the following differences in favor of esophageal capsule endoscopy: (i) total positive attitude has been found higher (chi(2)= 18.2, df = 2, P= 0.00), (ii) less patients felt pain (chi(2)= 6.9, df = 2, P= 0.03) and discomfort (chi(2)= 22.1, df = 2, P= 0.00), (iii) less patients experienced difficulty (chi(2)= 13.7, df = 2, P= 0.01), and (iv) more patients were willing to undergo esophageal capsule endoscopy in the future (chi(2)= 12.1, df = 2, P= 0.002). Esophageal capsule endoscopy was characterized by a more positive general attitude and caused less pain and discomfort. Sedated conventional endoscopy has been found more difficult. More patients would repeat esophageal capsule endoscopy in the future. Patients' total position for all three available techniques for esophageal endoscopy was excellent and renders the observed advantage of esophageal capsule endoscopy over both sedated conventional and unsedated ultrathin endoscopy a statistical finding without a real clinical benefit.