Search

Aim: To assess the long-term outcomes of this procedure after removal of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS). The efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) with SEMS were also assessed., Methods: Between January 2010 and April 2015, 12 patients with acute calculous cholecystitis, who were deemed unsuitable for cholecystectomy, underwent EUS-GBD with a SEMS. EUS-GBD was performed under the guidance of EUS and fluoroscopy, by puncturing the gallbladder with a needle, inserting a guidewire, dilating the puncture hole, and placing a SEMS. The SEMS was removed and/or replaced with a 7-Fr plastic pigtail stent after cholecystitis improved. The technical and clinical success rates, adverse event rate, and recurrence rate were all measured., Results: The rates of technical success, clinical success, and adverse events were 100%, 100%, and 0%, respectively. After cholecystitis improved, the SEMS was removed without replacement in eight patients, whereas it was replaced with a 7-Fr pigtail stent in four patients. Recurrence was seen in one patient (8.3%) who did not receive a replacement pigtail stent. The median follow-up period after EUS-GBD was 304 d (78-1492)., Conclusion: EUS-GBD with a SEMS is a possible alternative treatment for acute cholecystitis. Long-term outcomes after removal of the SEMS were excellent. Removal of the SEMS at 4-wk after SEMS placement and improvement of symptoms might avoid migration of the stent and recurrence of cholecystitis due to food impaction., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: All authors declare no conflicts-of-interest related to this article.

Aim: To compare the efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot forceps biopsy (HFB) for diminutive colorectal polyps., Methods: This prospective, randomized single-center clinical trial included consecutive patients ≥ 20 years of age with diminutive colorectal polyps 3-5 mm from December 2014 to October 2015. The primary outcome measures were en-bloc resection (endoscopic evaluation) and complete resection rates (pathological evaluation). The secondary outcome measures were the immediate bleeding or immediate perforation rate after polypectomy, delayed bleeding or delayed perforation rate after polypectomy, use of clipping for bleeding or perforation, and polyp retrieval rate. Prophylactic clipping after polyp removal wasn't routinely performed., Results: Two hundred eight patients were randomized into the CSP (102), HFB (106) and 283 polyps were evaluated (CSP: 148, HFB: 135). The en-bloc resection rate was significantly higher with CSP than with HFB [99.3% (147/148) vs 80.0% (108/135), P < 0.0001]. The complete resection rate was significantly higher with CSP than with HFB [80.4% (119/148) vs 47.4% (64/135), P < 0.0001]. The immediate bleeding rate was similar between the groups [8.6% (13/148) vs 8.1% (11/135), P = 1.000], and endoscopic hemostasis with hemoclips was successful in all cases. No cases of perforation or delayed bleeding occurred. The rate of severe tissue injury to the pathological specimen was higher HFB than CSP [52.6% (71/135) vs 1.3% (2/148), P < 0.0001]. Polyp retrieval failure was encountered CSP (7), HFB (2)., Conclusion: CSP is more effective than HFB for resecting diminutive polyps. Further long-term follow-up study is required., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: None to declare.