INTRODUCTION: Endoscopy-related injury (ERI) is common in gastroenterologists (GI). The study aim was to assess the prevalence of self-reported ERI, patterns of injury, and endoscopist knowledge of preventative strategies in a nationally representative sample. METHODS: A 38-item electronic survey was sent to 15,868 American College of Gastroenterology physician members. The survey was completed by 1,698 members and was included in analyses. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted to evaluate the likelihood of ERI based on workload parameters and gender. RESULTS: ERI was reported by 75% of respondents. ERI was most common in the thumb (63.3%), neck (59%), hand/finger (56.5%), lower back (52.6%), shoulder (47%), and wrist (45%). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of ERI between men and women GI. However, women GI were significantly more likely to report upper extremity ERI while men were more likely to report lower-back pain-related ERI. Significant gender differences were noted in the reported mechanisms attributed to ERI. Most respondents did not discuss ergonomic strategies in their current practice (63%). ERI was less likely to be reported in GI who took breaks during endoscopy (P = 0.002). DISCUSSION: ERI is highly prevalent in GI physicians. Significant gender differences regarding specific sites affected by ERI and the contributing mechanisms were observed. Results strongly support institution of training in ergonomics for all GI as a strategy to prevent its impact on providers of endoscopy. JOURNAL/ajgast/04.03/00000434-202103000-00021/inline-graphic1/v/2023-07-18T070745Z/r/image-tiff
This decision tree model provides a context for balancing the risk and benefit of LB in NAFLD. With early biopsy, and early intervention, the relative return of preventing advanced liver disease per LB was high.
Malignant gastroduodenal obstruction can occur in up to 20% of patients with primary pancreatic, gastric or duodenal carcinomas. Presenting symptoms include nausea, vomiting, abdominal distention, pain and decreased oral intake which can lead to dehydration, malnutrition, and poor quality of life. Endoscopic stent placement has become the primary therapeutic modality because it is safe, minimally invasive, and a cost-effective option for palliation. Stents can be successfully deployed in the majority of patients. Stent placement appears to lead to a shorter time to symptomatic improvement, shorter time to resumption of an oral diet, and shorter hospital stays as compared with surgical options. Recurrence of the obstructive symptoms resulting from stent occlusion, due to tumor ingrowth or overgrowth, can be successfully treated with repeat endoscopic stent placement in the majority of the cases. Both endoscopic stenting and surgical bypass are considered palliative treatments and, to date, no improvement in survival with either modality has been demonstrated. A tailored therapeutic approach, taking into consideration patient preferences and involving a multidisciplinary team including the therapeutic endoscopist, surgeon, medical oncologist, radiation therapist, and interventional radiologist, should be considered in all cases.
Background Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may be at higher risk for complications from radiation treatment for prostate cancer. However, available data are limited, and controversy remains regarding the best treatment approach for IBD patients who develop prostate cancer. Methods A retrospective cohort study across 4 Department of Veterans Affairs hospital systems. Patients with established IBD who were diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer between 1996–2015 were included. We assessed for flares of IBD, IBD-related hospitalizations, and IBD-related surgeries within 6, 12, and 24 months of cancer diagnosis and survival at 1, 2, and 5 years. Flares of IBD were those documented as such by the treating physician, and treatment changed accordingly. Results One hundred patients with IBD and prostate cancer were identified. Forty-seven were treated with either treatment with external beam radiation or brachytherapy, and 53 were treated with nonradiation modalities. Comparing cohorts with or without radiation treatment, there were no differences in baseline IBD characteristics, Charlson comorbidity index, or prostate cancer stage. Inflammatory bowel disease flares were 2-fold higher for radiation-treated patients within 6 months (10.6% vs 5.7%) and 6–12 months (4.3% vs 1.9%) after cancer diagnosis. On multiple logistic regression analysis, radiation treatment (adjusted odds ratio, 4.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.15–20.26) was a significant predictor of flares. However, rates of IBD-related hospitalizations or surgeries were not significantly different. Conclusions In this retrospective, multicenter study, 2-fold higher rates of flare were found within the first year after prostate cancer diagnosis for patients treated with radiation, but there were no differences in IBD-related hospitalizations or surgeries. Although patients should be counseled of these risks, avoidance of radiation therapy in IBD patients with prostate cancer is likely not necessary.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.