Obscure gastrointestinal hemorrhage from mesenteric varices diagnosed by video capsule endoscopy

Section of Gastroenterology, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Digestive Diseases and Sciences (Impact Factor: 2.55). 08/2006; 51(7):1169-74. DOI: 10.1007/s10620-006-8027-6
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Without Abstract

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ectopic varices (EcV) comprise large portosystemic venous collaterals located anywhere other than the gastro-oesophageal region. No large series or randomized-controlled trials address this subject, and therefore its management is based on available expertise and facilities, and may require a multidisciplinary team approach. EcV are common findings during endoscopy in portal hypertensive patients and their bleeding accounts for only 1-5% of all variceal bleeding. EcV develop secondary to portal hypertension (PHT), surgical procedures, anomalies in venous outflow, or abdominal vascular thrombosis and may be familial in origin. Bleeding EcV may present with anaemia, shock, haematemesis, melaena or haematochezia and should be considered in patients with PHT and gastrointestinal bleeding or anaemia of obscure origin. EcV may be discovered during panendoscopy, enteroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, wireless capsule endoscopy, diagnostic angiography, multislice helical computed tomography, magnetic resonance angiography, colour Doppler-flow imaging, laparotomy, laparoscopy and occasionally during autopsy. Patients with suspected EcV bleeding need immediate assessment, resuscitation, haemodynamic stabilization and referral to specialist centres. Management of EcV involves medical, endoscopic, interventional radiological and surgical modalities depending on patients' condition, site of varices, available expertise and patients' subsequent management plan.
    Hepatology International 10/2008; 2(3):322-34. DOI:10.1007/s12072-008-9074-1 · 2.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: L’hémorragie digestive par rupture de varices ectopiques est une complication rare de l’hypertension portale (HTP). La rareté de cette situation d’urgence explique le manque de consensus concernant sa prise en charge. Le traitement peut être médical, radiologique, chirurgical ou endoscopique. L’endoscopie dans ce cas peut être techniquement rendue difficile pour des raisons d’accessibilité comme dans le cas de varices grêliques. Nous vous présentons le cas d’une patiente ayant des varices anastomotiques cholédocojéjunales hémorragiques traitées efficacement par encollage grâce à l’entéroscopie à double ballon. Gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to rupture from ectopic varices is an infrequent complication due to portal hypertension. The unusual happening of this emergency situation explains the lack of consensus regarding its management. The treatment may be medical, radiological, surgical or endoscopic. The endoscopy in this case can be technically difficult for accessibility reasons, as in the case of small-bowel varices. We present the case of a patient with bleeding varices from choledoco-jejunal anastomosis treated effectively by sclerotherapy with double balloon enteroscopy. Mots clésEntéroscopie double ballon–Varice ectopique–Anastomose cholédocojéjunale–Hypertension portale KeywordsDouble balloon enteroscopy–Ectopic varice–Choledoco jejunal anastomosis–Portal hypertension
    Acta Endoscopica 03/2011; 41(2):62-64. DOI:10.1007/s10190-011-0145-4 · 0.16 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy (CE) and its impact on treatment and outcome in patients without bleeding indications. One hundred and sixty-five nonbleeding patients were enrolled in the study. The most common indications for CE were chronic abdominal pain alone (33 patients) or combined with chronic diarrhea (31 patients) and chronic diarrhea alone (30 patients). Among the 165 patients, 129 underwent CE for evaluation of gastrointestinal symptoms and 36 for surveillance or disease staging. CE findings were positive, suspicious and negative in 73 (44.2%), 13 (7.9%) and 79 (47.9%) of cases, respectively. The diagnostic yield was highest in patients with refractory celiac disease (10/10, 100%) and suspected Crohn's disease (5/6, 83.3%), followed by patients with chronic abdominal pain and chronic diarrhea (13/31, 41.9%), established Crohn's disease (2/6, 33.3%), chronic diarrhea alone (8/30, 26.7%), chronic abdominal pain alone (8/33, 24.2%) and other indications (3/13, 23.1%) (p < 0.005). The CE findings led to a change of medication in 74 (47.7%) patients, surgery in 15 (9.7%), administration of a strict gluten-free or other special diet in 13 (8.4%) and had other consequences in 11 (6.7%). Management was not modified in 42 (27.1%) patients. Among symptomatic patients (n = 129), 29 (22.5%) were lost to follow-up. The remaining 100 patients were followed up for 8.7 ± 4.0 months (range 2-19). Among the latter, resolution or improvement of symptoms was observed in 86 (86%) patients, no change in 11 (11%) and 3 (3%) died. All 86 patients who experienced resolution or improvement of their symptoms had a modification of their management after CE; only 7/11 patients whose symptoms did not change (63.6%) and 2/3 patients who died (66.7%) had a modification of management (p < 0.001). CE appears to be a useful tool in the evaluation of patients with nonbleeding indications. The outcome of most patients with negative findings was excellent.
    Medical Principles and Practice 01/2011; 20(4):362-7. DOI:10.1159/000324548 · 1.11 Impact Factor