Sigmoid stiffener for decompression tube placement in colonic pseudo-obstruction

Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction

Background

Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction is characterized by clinical and radiological evidence of acute large bowel obstruction in the absence of a mechanical cause. The condition usually affects elderly people with underlying co-morbidities, and early recognition and appropriate management are essential to reduce the occurrence of life-threatening complications.

Methods

A part-systematic review was conducted. This was based on key publications focusing on advances in management.

Results and conclusions

Although acute colonic dilatation has been suggested to result from a functional imbalance in autonomic nerve supply, there is little direct evidence for this. Other aetiologies derived from the evolving field of neurogastroenterology remain underexplored. The rationale of treatment is to achieve prompt and effective colonic decompression. Initial management includes supportive interventions that may be followed by pharmacological therapy. Controlled clinical trials have shown that the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor neostigmine is an effective treatment with initial response rates of 60–90 per cent; other drugs for use in this area are in evolution. Colonoscopic decompression is successful in approximately 80 per cent of patients, with other minimally invasive strategies continuing to be developed. Surgery has thus become largely limited to those in whom complications occur. A contemporary management algorithm is provided on this basis.

Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction

Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (ACPO) is a syndrome of massive dilation of the colon without mechanical obstruction that develops in hospitalised patients with serious underlying medical and surgical conditions. ACPO is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, and, therefore, requires urgent gastroenterologic evaluation. Appropriate evaluation of the markedly distended colon involves excluding mechanical obstruction and other causes of toxic megacolon such as Clostridium difficile infection, and assessing for signs of ischemia and perforation. Increasing age, cecal diameter, delay in decompression, and status of the bowel significantly influence mortality, which is approximately 40% when ischemia or perforation is present. The risk of colonic perforation in ACPO increases when cecal diameter exceeds 12cm and when the distention has been present for greater than 6days. Appropriate management includes supportive therapy and selective use of neostigmine and colonoscopy for decompression. Early recognition and management are critical in minimising complications.

A cost analysis of endoscopic ultrasound in the evaluation of esophageal cancer

OBJECTIVE

The use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) of suspicious lymph nodes has become an important aid in the staging of esophageal carcinoma. The economic impact of this staging strategy has not yet been described. We applied a decision analysis model to compare the costs of EUS FNA, CT-guided FNA, and surgery in the management of esophageal tumors. A cost-minimization approach was employed, as viewed from the perspective of the payer.

METHODS

A decision analysis model with three management arms was designed using DATA 3.5 software, taking the entry criteria as esophageal carcinoma without evidence of distant metastases as determined by CT. Detection of tumor on celiac lymph node (CLN) FNA signified unresectability and prompted palliative treatment: chemoradiotherapy with endoscopic esophageal stenting rather than surgery. Baseline probabilities were varied through plausible ranges using sensitivity analysis. Cost inputs were based on Medicare professional fees plus Medicare facility fees. The endpoint was the cost of management per patient.

RESULTS

EUS FNA was the least costly strategy ($13,811), compared to CT FNA ($14,350) and surgery ($13,992). The model outcome was sensitive to changes in both EUS FNA sensitivity and prevalence of CLN metastases. EUS FNA remained the least costly option provided the prevalence of CLN involvement was >16%; below this value, surgery became the most economical strategy.

CONCLUSION

By minimizing unnecessary surgery, primarily by detecting CLN involvement, EUS FNA is the least costly staging strategy in the workup of patients with nonmetastatic esophageal cancer. Under certain circumstances, surgery is the preferred strategy.