METHODS: We prospectively analyzed the use of FloSeal with a hemostatic delivery system in transnasal endoscopic and microscopic skull base procedures performed at the authors' institution from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2015. In all cases the number of aliquots was noted for the entire operation, and the total number of FloSeal ampules of 5 mL was also recorded.
RESULTS: Our device allowed controlled application of small amounts (0.5-1 mL) of FloSeal to the site of bleeding. This controlled application resulted not only in increased visibility during its application, but it also reduced the amount of FloSeal required during the procedure. We were able to use 5-10 applications per 5-mL ampule of FloSeal within an individual procedure. No procedure required more than one 5-mL ampule of FloSeal. Therefore, the use of our device results in a reduction of costs. Prior to the use of our device, we were often only able to use 1 vial of 5 ml of material for 1 or 2 applications, especially in transnasal endoscopic procedures when working along a deep corridor.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that our delivery device of FlowSeal can effectively control hemostasis by applying small amounts of FlowSeal to the site of bleeding. This results in increased visibility during hemostasis and a reduction of cost.
AIM: To evaluate the preferred diagnosis and management practices of BE among Asian endoscopists.
METHODS: Endoscopists from across Asia were invited to participate in an online questionnaire comprising eleven questions regarding diagnosis, surveillance and management of BE.
RESULTS: Five hundred sixty-nine of 1016 (56.0%) respondents completed the survey, with most respondents from Japan (n = 310, 54.5%) and China (n = 129, 22.7%). Overall, the preferred endoscopic landmark of the esophagogastric junction was squamo-columnar junction (42.0%). Distal palisade vessels was preferred in Japan (59.0% vs 10.0%, P < 0.001) while outside Japan, squamo-columnar junction was preferred (59.5% vs 27.4%, P < 0.001). Only 16.3% of respondents used Prague C and M criteria all the time. It was never used by 46.1% of Japanese, whereas 84.2% outside Japan, endoscopists used it to varying extents (P < 0.001). Most Asian endoscopists (70.8%) would survey long-segment BE without dysplasia every two years. Adherence to Seattle protocol was poor with only 6.3% always performing it. 73.2% of Japanese never did it, compared to 19.3% outside Japan (P < 0.001). The most preferred (74.0%) treatment of non-dysplastic BE was proton pump inhibitor only when the patient was symptomatic or had esophagitis. For BE with low-grade dysplasia, 6-monthly surveillance was preferred in 61.9% within Japan vs 47.9% outside Japan (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Diagnosis and management of BE varied within Asia, with stark contrast between Japan and outside Japan. Most Asian endoscopists chose squamo-columnar junction to be the landmark for esophagogastric junction, which is incorrect. Most also did not consistently use Prague criteria, and Seattle protocol. Lack of standardization, education and research are possible reasons.
METHODS: A prospective analysis of ninety nine H. pylori-positive patients who underwent endoscopy in our Endoscopy suite were included in this study. DNA was isolated from antral biopsy samples and the presence of cagA, iceA, and iceA2 genotypes were determined by polymerase chain reaction and a reverse hybridization technique. Screening for H. pylori infection was performed in all patients using the rapid urease test (CLO-Test).
RESULTS: From a total of 326 patients who underwent endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal symptoms, 99 patients were determined to be H. pylori-positive. Peptic ulceration was seen in 33 patients (33%). The main virulence strain observed in this cohort was the cagA gene isolated in 43 patients. cagA was associated with peptic ulcer pathology in 39.5% (17/43) and in 28% (16/56) of non-ulcer patients. IceA1 was present in 29 patients (29%) and iceA2 in 15 patients (15%). Ulcer pathology was seen in 39% (11/29) of patients with iceA1, while 31% (22/70) had normal findings. The corresponding values for iceA2 were 33% (5/15) and 33% (28/84), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Virulence factors were not common in our cohort. The incidence of factors cagA, iceA1 and iceA2 were very low although variations were noted in different ethnic groups.