No abstract

The clinical presentation of CI is very heterogeneous, perhaps explaining why clinical suspicion of this disease is so low. The presence of IRCI, and occurrence of peritoneal signs or onset of CI as severe abdominal pain without bleeding, should alert the physician to a potentially unfavorable course.

No abstract

Peptic ulcer rebleeding virtually does not occur in patients with complicated ulcers after H. pylori eradication. Maintenance anti-ulcer (antisecretory) therapy is not necessary if eradication is achieved. However, NSAID intake or H. pylori reinfection may exceptionally cause rebleeding in H. pylori-eradicated patients.

Introduction: accurate preoperative localization of colorectal cancer (CRC) is very important, with a wide range of published error rates.Aims: to determine accuracy of endoscopic localization of CRC in comparison with preoperative computed tomography (CT). To analyse variables that could be associated with a wrong endoscopic localization.Patients and methods: endoscopic and CT localization of a series of CRC without previous surgery were reviewed. We studied the concordance between endoscopic and radiologic localization against operative findings comparing accuracy of endoscopy and CT. We analysed the frequency of wrong endoscopic diagnoses with regard to a series of patient, endoscopy and tumor variables.Results: two hundred thirty seven CRC in 223 patients were studied. Concordance with surgical localization was: colonoscopy = 0.87 and CT = 0.69. Endoscopic localization accuracy was: 91.1%; CT: 76.2%: p = 0.00001; OR = 3.22 (1.82-5.72). Obstructive cancer presented a higher rate of wrong localization: 18 vs. 5.7% in non-obstructive tumors (p = 0.0034; OR = 3.65 (1.35-9.96). Endoscopic localization mistakes varied depending on tumor location, being more frequent in descending colon: 36.3%, p = 0.014; p = 0.007;.Conclusions: endoscopic accuracy for CRC localization was very high and significantly better than CT accuracy. Obstructive tumor and those located in the descending colon or cecum were associated with a significant increase of the error risk of CRC endoscopic localization.

The results of the 2 nd Spanish Consensus Conference for appropriate practice regarding indications for eradication, diagnostic tests, and therapy regimens for Helicobacter pylori infection are summarized. The Conference was based on literature searches in Medline, abstracts from three international meetings, and abstracts from national meetings. Results were agreed upon and approved by the whole group. Results are supplemented by evidence grades and recommendation levels according to the classification used in the Clinical Practice Guidelines issued by Cochrane Collaboration. Convincing indications (peptic ulcer, duodenal erosions with no history of ASA or NSAIDs, MALT lymphoma), and not so convincing indications (functional dyspepsia, patients receiving lowdose ASA for platelet aggregation, gastrectomy stump in patients operated on for gastric cancer, first-degree relatives of patients with gastric cancer, lymphocytic gastritis, and Ménétrier's disease) for H. pylori eradication are discussed. Diagnostic recommendations for various clinical conditions (peptic ulcer, digestive hemorrhage secondary to ulcer, eradication control, patients currently or recently receiving antibiotic or antisecretory therapy), as well as diagnostic tests requiring biopsy collection (histology, urease fast test, and culture) when endoscopy is needed for clinical diagnosis, and non-invasive tests requiring no biopsy collection (13 C-urea breath test, serologic tests, and fecal antigen tests) when endoscopy is not needed are also discussed. As regards treatment, first-choice therapies (triple therapy using a PPI and two antibiotics), therapy length, quadruple therapy, and a number of novel antibiotic options as "rescue" therapy are prioritized, the fact that prolonging PPI therapy following effective eradication is unnecessary for patients with duodenal ulcer but not for all gastric ulcers is documented, the fact that cultures and antibiograms are not needed for all eradicating therapies is indicated, and finally the test and treat strategy is considered adequate, however only under certain circumstances.

Peptic ulcer rebleeding does not occur in patients with complicated ulcers after H. pylori eradication. Maintenance anti-ulcer (antisecretory) therapy is not necessary if eradication is achieved.

Aim: to identify possible risk factors for the development of metachronous lesions in colorectal cancer (CRC) which would allow to establish a post-surgical individual prognostic index.Patients and methods: three hundred eighty-two surgically treated CRC were reviewed. We compared the incidence of metachronous lesions in 40 variables concerning patient clinical data and initial neoplastic findings. An individual risk index for metachronicity was drawn up including those variables which presented significant differences in multivariate logistic regression, dividing patients into three groups.Results: variables with prognostic value for metachronicity were distal cancer location: OR= 2.30 (1.03-5.13), alcohol intake: OR = 2.20 (1.08-4.48), presence of synchronous adenomas: isolated: OR = 2.47 (1.03-4.48), multiple: OR = 4.26 (1.78-10.17), and presence of synchronous advanced adenoma: OR= 2.91 (1.52-12.60). Tumor MUC-5 expression proved to have a protective role: ). An individual risk score was established considering these variables and patients could be classified into three groups, with a discrimination power for metachronicity of p< 0.0000001. Classification in high and low risk groups had a sensitivity = 75.32%, specificity = 84.21%, positive predictive value = 75.34%, negative predictive value = 92.31% and global diagnostic accuracy = 80.75%.Conclusions: the identification of risk factors for the development of metachronous lesions allow to calculate, at the time of surgical treatment, an individual prognostic index and to classify patients into three different risk groups. In high and low risk groups, both specificity and accuracy were acceptable for the prognosis of metachronous lesions, being remarkable the negative predictive power of our classification, which could become relevant when planning a different endoscopic follow up of these patients.Key words: Colorectal cancer. Follow-up. Metachronous lesions. INTRODUCTIONThe majority of colorectal cancers (CRC) are sporadic cases (1,2) and little is known about metachronous or synchronous neoplasms development (3,4). These multicentric lesions could be due to mutations in genes related to apoptosis, cellular proliferation or DNA repairing (5), or forms of hereditary non polyposis colorectal cancer syndrome with low penetrance (6). Finally, this tumor multicentricity could be caused by multiple interacting factors, such as personal or familial predisposition, environmental mechanisms, morphological or immunophenotypical tumor features which would favoured an increased risk of neoplasm development along different colonic sites (7). Once the tumor and all the possible synchronic lesions are endoscopically or surgically resected, the tumor multicentricity might promote the development of new neoplastic lesions (8,9). Similar to synchronous lesions, metachronic neoplasms will be adenomas in most cases and less frequently CRC. There are several publications related to development of metachronous lesions after the resection of the initial polyps in patient...