Search

Introduccion: la lesion de Dieulafoy en intestino delgado es una causa infrecuente de hemorragia digestiva que recidiva frecuentemente tras su tratamiento endoscopico. Material y metodos: se presenta un estudio observacional, descriptivo, retrospectivo y unicentrico de 15 pacientes con hemorragia de intestino delgado, diagnosticados de lesion de Dieulafoy con capsula endoscopica o enteroscopia doble balon, en los que se realizo tratamiento endoscopico combinado. Resultados y conclusiones: durante una mediana de seguimiento de 33,5 meses (rango 2-145), recidivaron tres de los 12 casos que se pudieron seguir (25 %) y todos ocurrieron precozmente en las primeras 48 horas tras la terapeutica. Se retrataron con exito dos de ellos con una nueva enteroscopia.

Background and Aim There are few data concerning emergency double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and its usefulness in the management of severe acute obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate emergency DBE and capsule endoscopy (CE) in patients with overt OGIB, analyzing the feasibility of this combined approach. Methods Emergency DBE in patients with overt OGIB was defined as performance within 24 h of symptom onset. We reported 27 patients (16 men, mean age: 64.6 ± 17.9 years) with overt severe bleeding who underwent 29 emergency DBE (22 anterograde, 7 retrograde). Of 27 patients, 16 (59.3%) underwent CE with real time (RT) viewing. Results Patients were diagnosed with the following: Dieulafoy's lesion (DL; n = 11, 40.7%), angioectasia (n = 7, 25.9%), tumors (n = 4, 14.8%), diverticulum (n = 3, 11.1%), ulcers (n = 2, 7.4%). We diagnosed 23 lesions amenable to endoscopic hemostasis and successfully treated 21 of them (77.8%). DL detection rate was statistically higher in the emergency DBE group than in OGIB patients with DBE done 24 h after symptom onset (40.7% vs 0.9%, respectively, P

espanolIntroduccion y objetivo: la capsula endoscopica y la enteroscopia de doble balon son tecnicas de reconocido valor en el estudio de la hemorragia digestiva media, habiendo numerosos factores que pueden afectar a su rendimiento diagnostico. El objetivo del presente estudio es el de caracterizar y definir los niveles de concordancia entre ambas focalizando en el tipo de lesion, en una gran cohorte de pacientes de un centro de referencia. Material y metodo: entre los anos 2004-2014 se administraron 1.209 capsulas en 1.078 pacientes y se realizaron 381 enteroscopias en 361 pacientes con hemorragia digestiva media. Resultados: en 332 pacientes (edad media: 65,22 ± 15,41, 183 hombres) se realizaron ambos procedimientos. Ambas tecnicas tuvieron un rendimiento diagnostico similar (70,5% vs. 69,6%, p = 0,9). El rendimiento diagnostico global de la enteroscopia fue superior en pacientes con una capsula previa positiva (79,3% vs. 27,9%, p 0,55-0,77]), tumores (0,66 [95% IC: 0,55-0,76]) y moderada para ulceras (0.56 [95% IC: 0,46-0,67]). Los diverticulos (0,39 [95% IC: 0,29-0,5] tuvieron una concordancia razonable. Los resultados entre ambos procedimientos difirieron en 73 pacientes (22%). Conclusiones: el presente estudio evidencia que aunque el rendimiento de la capsula endoscopica y la enteroscopia de doble balon de forma global sean similares, hay numerosos factores que pueden modificar estos valores, siendo el principal el tipo de lesion. EnglishBackground and aim: Capsule endoscopy and doubleballoon enteroscopy are well-recognized procedures in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, with many factors that may influence their diagnosis yield. The aim of the present study was to characterize the degree of agreement between both techniques with focus on the type of lesion in a large cohort of patients at a referral center. Material and method: One thousand two hundred and nine capsules were administered in 1,078 patients and 381 enteroscopies were performed in 361 patients with obscure-gastrointestinal bleeding from 2004 to 2014. Results: Both procedures were carried out in 332 patients (mean age: 65.22 ± 15.41, 183 men) and they have a similar diagnosis yield (70.5% vs. 69.6%, p = 0.9). Overall enteroscopy diagnosis yield was higher within patients with a previous positive capsule endoscopy (79.3% vs. 27.9%, p 0.46-0.67]). Diverticula (0.39 [95% CI: 0.29-0.5]) achieved a fair agreement. The results of CE and DBE differed in 73 patients (22%). Conclusions: The present study confirms that although overall diagnostic yield by capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy is similar, there are many factors which can modify these values, mainly the type of lesion.