Background: Intensive intravenous treatment remains the first line therapy of severe, uncomplicated attacks of ulcerative colitis. Aim: To predict the failure of intensive intravenous treatment by combining clinical and laboratory parameters with endoscopy findings. Methods: Retrospective study conducted in a tertiary care referral centre. Failure of intensive intravenous treatment was defined as colectomy before day 30, intravenous cyclosporin, or death. Predictive factors of outcome were assessed using univariate and multivariate prognostic analysis. Results: Between January 1990 and May 1997, 85 consecutive patients were treated with intensive intravenous treatment for non‐response to oral corticosteroids (n=59) and/or severe attack of ulcerative colitis (n=26). There were 41 successes and 44 failures (including 1 death, 13 cyclosporin and 30 colectomies before day 30). Multivariate prognostic analysis found that the presence of Truelove and Witts’ criteria (P=0.018), an attack that had lasted more than 6 weeks (P=0.001), and severe endoscopic lesions (P=0.007) were associated with an increased risk of failure. Patients with severe endoscopic lesions and Truelove and Witts’ criteria, or an attack of more than 6 weeks had a failure rate of 85–86%. Conclusion: Clinical, laboratory and endoscopic findings can predict the risk of failure of intensive intravenous treatment. A prospective study is required to confirm these results.

No abstract

: Although the relationship between the onset of visual symptoms and the infusion of infliximab may have been coincidental, we believe that this case report underscores the clinical awareness of the possible association, especially in light of the increasing use of this cytokine inhibitor.

Introduction: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography associated with sphincterotomy and stone extraction with balloon or Dormia basket represents the gold standard for the management of common bile duct stones. The aim of our study were to investigate the predictors of failure of standard endoscopic techniques during the management of common bile duct stones. Methods: A retrospective study including all endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for common bile duct stones between January 2014 and December 2017 was conducted. First line treatment was based on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with endoscopic sphincterotomy and balloon or Dormia extraction. Second line endoscopic treatment was based on macrodilatation of Oddi sphincter, mechanical lithotripsy, biliary stent or nasobiliary drain placement. Predictors of failure of standard endoscopic techniques were sought by uni and multivariate analysis (SPSS software, p significant if < 0.05). Results: One hundred eighty one patients (mean age 64 years and sex ratio M/W ¼ 0.4) were included. Main indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were residual or recurrent lithiasis (67.4%, n ¼ 122). Cholangiography revealed multiple stones in 53 patients with an average size of 12.5mm [3-40]. The success rate of first line treatment was 61.9%. Independent predictors of failure of standard endoscopic techniques (failure of papillary cannulation or stone extraction) according to multivariate analysis were: an age greater than 65 years OR 0.516 [0.272-0.979], an intra-diverticular papilla OR 0.179 [0.035-0.914], a common bile duct diameter greater than 15 mm OR 0.161 [0.068-0.385] and a stenosis of the common bile duct OR 0.068 [0.008-0.605]. The success rate of the second line treatment was 73%. Conclusion: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography results in a successful clearance of the common bile duct in almost two-thirds of patients. In case of predictors of failure, alternative techniques can increase this rate.

Background Signet-ring cell carcinoma of the stomach (SRCC) is a particular gastric cancer entity. Its incidence is increasing. Its diagnosis is pathological; it corresponds to adenocarcinoma with a majority of signet-ring cells component (> 50%). These histological features give it its aggressiveness characteristics. This has repercussions on the prognostic level and implications for the alternatives of therapy, especially since some authors suggest a potential chemoresistance. This survey aimed to identify the epidemiological, pathological, therapeutic, and prognostic characteristics of SRCC as a separate disease entity. Methods This was a retrospective study of 123 patients admitted for gastric adenocarcinoma to Habib Thameur Hospital in Tunis over 11 years from January 2006 to December 2016. A comparative study was performed between 2 groups: the SRCC group with 62 patients and the non-SRCC (non-signet-ring cell carcinoma of the stomach) with 61 patients. Results The prevalence of SRCC in our series was 50%. SRCC affected significantly younger patients (55 vs 62 years; p = 0.004). The infiltrative character was more common in SRCC tumors (30.6 vs 14.8%; p = 0.060), whereas the budding character was more often noted in non-SRCC tumors (78.7 vs 58.1%; p = 0.039). There was no significant difference in tumor localization between both groups. Linitis plastica was noted in 14 patients with SRCC against a single patient with non-SRCC (p = 0.001). The tumor size was more important in the non-SRCC group (6.84 vs 6.39 cm; p = 0.551). Peritoneal carcinomatosis was noted in 4.3% of cases in the SRCC group versus 2.2% of cases in the NSRCC group (p = 0.570). Total gastrectomy was more often performed in the SRCC group (87 vs 56%; p = 0.001). Resection was more often curative in the non-SRCC group (84.4 vs 78.3%; p = 0.063). Postoperative chemotherapy was more commonly indicated in the SRCC group (67.4 vs 53.3%; p = 0.339). Tumor recurrence was more common in the non-SRCC group (35.7 vs 32%; p = 0.776). The most common type of recurrence was peritoneal carcinomatosis in the SRCC group (62.5%) and hepatic metastasis in the non-SRCC group (60%; p = 0.096). The overall 5-year survival in the SRCC group was lower than in the non-SRCC group, with no statistically significant difference (47.1 vs 51.5%; p = 0.715). The overall survival was more important for SRCC in early cancer (100 vs 80%; p = 0.408), whereas it was higher for non-SRCC in advanced cancer (48.1 vs 41.9%; p = 0.635). Conclusion Apart from its epidemiological and pathological features, SRCC seems to have a worse prognosis. Indeed, it is diagnosed at a more advanced stage and has a worse prognosis in advanced cancer than non-SRCC. It is therefore to be considered as a particular entity of gastric adenocarcinoma requiring a specific therapeutic protocol where the place of chemotherapy remains to be more investigated.