Erythrocyte sedimentation rate can predict severe AP with a slightly inferior performance to CRP. Combined ESR and CRP at 24 hours can predict severe AP accurately.

BackgroundThe advent of double-balloon enteroscopy has enabled more accurate diagnosis and treatment of small bowel disorders. Single-balloon enteroscopy permits visualization of the entire small intestine less often than does double-balloon enteroscopy. However, the relative clinical advantages of the 2 methods remain controversial. This study therefore aimed to identify the indications for and therapeutic impact of performing single-balloon enteroscopy.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data from adults who underwent single-balloon enteroscopy from January 2007 through November 2011 and analyzed their baseline characteristics, endoscopic findings, pathological diagnoses, and clinical outcomes.ResultsA total of 145 procedures were performed in 116 patients with a mean age of 58.1 ± 17.7 years (range, 18–89 years). The most common indications for performing single-balloon enteroscopy were overt gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, chronic diarrhea, and occult GI bleeding, accounting for 57.9%, 12.4%, and 9.7% of the patients, respectively. The area of interest was achieved in 80.7% of the cases, with a 5.5% rate of technical failure. An overall positive finding was detected in 65.5% of the cases, of which 33.8% were ulcers and erosions; 8.3%, masses; and 3.4%, angiodysplasia. The diagnostic yields were 42.9%, 52.4%, 78.6%, 50.0%, and 25.0% for patients with overt GI bleeding, occult GI bleeding, abdominal pain, chronic diarrhea, and abnormal imaging results, respectively. Therapeutic procedures were performed in 11% of patients with GI bleeding and achieved a therapeutic yield of 14.6% with a minor complication rate of 11.7%.ConclusionsSingle-balloon enteroscopy was effective for the diagnosis and treatment of small bowel disorders, especially in patients who presented with abdominal pain, GI bleeding, or focal abnormalities on imaging scans.

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common cause of hospital admission worldwide, and has a mortality rate of between 2% and 15%. 1 Recent guidelines have recommended stratifying patients with UGIB into higher and lower risk categories for treatment decisions and prognostication. 1-3 The widely used scoring systems include the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), Rockall score (RS), and AIMS65 score (AIMS65) (Table 1); however, their role in clinical practice remains uncertain. 4-6 Compared with other existing scores, AIMS65 is simple, easy to remember, can be calculated with nonweighted elements, and can be routinely evaluated in the emergency department. 7 These scores have been validated and compared, in terms of their accuracy in predicting various outcomes among patients presenting with UGIB, in numerous studies. 7-11 Most of the previous studies included both patients with nonvariceal