Endosonography For Right-sided and Acute Upper Intestinal Misery: the EFRAIM study: A prospective, randomized, controlled, blinded study

What should be known prior to performing EUS?

Direct referral of patients for EUS – instead of preprocedural consultation with the endosonographer – has become standard practice (like for other endoscopic procedures) as it is time- and cost-effective. To ensure appropriate indications and safe examinations, the endosonographer should carefully consider what information is needed before accepting the referral. This includes important clinical data regarding relevant comorbidities, the fitness of the patient to consent and undergo the procedure, and the anticoagulation status. In addition, relevant findings from other imaging methods to clarify the clinical question may be necessary. Appropriate knowledge and management of the patients’ anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy, antibiotic prophylaxis, and sedation issues can avoid unnecessary delays and unsafe procedures. Insisting on optimal preparation, appropriate indications, and clear clinical referral questions will increase the quality of the outcomes of EUS. In this paper, important practical issues regarding EUS preparations are raised and discussed from different points of view.

What should be known prior to performing EUS exams? (Part II)

In “What should be known prior to performing EUS exams, Part I,” the authors discussed the need for clinical information and whether other imaging modalities are required before embarking EUS examinations. Herewith, we present part II which addresses some (technical) controversies how EUS is performed and discuss from different points of view providing the relevant evidence as available. (1) Does equipment design influence the complication rate? (2) Should we have a standardized screen orientation? (3) Radial EUS versus longitudinal (linear) EUS. (4) Should we search for incidental findings using EUS?

Initial experience of direct-to-test endoscopic ultrasonography for suspected choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound has become an invaluable tool in the investigation of patients with suspected pancreatobiliary disease. We set out to determine whether a "direct-to-test" endoscopic ultrasound procedure could be offered to selected patients with suspected choledocholithiasis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We included patients referred to our general gastroenterology service with clinical history, symptomatology and/or laboratory results compatible with choledocholithiais. Almost all patients had already had a transabdominal ultrasound performed at the request of their general practitioner. All patients underwent direct-to-test day-case endoscopic ultrasound under conscious sedation. Procedures were performed by a single practitioner using an oblique-viewing radial echoendoscope. The diagnostic yield and frequencies of discharge, onward referral and follow-up were determined. Overall diagnostic yield of direct-to-test endoscopic ultrasound was 61%. The most common diagnoses were cholelithiasis (18%) and choledocholithiasis (11%); one periampullary cancer was also detected. A definitive outcome (discharge or referral for a therapeutic procedure) occurred in 14 of 28 patients (50%). The remaining 14 patients underwent further out-patient evaluation. Eventual diagnoses in this group included autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cirrhosis and drug-induced hepatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with suspected biliary disease, direct-to-test endoscopic ultrasound has a high diagnostic yield, and may be an appropriate mode of investigation.