Point-of-care Ultrasound of the Gastrointestinal Tract

The widespread use of portable ultrasound scanners has promoted the concept of point of care ultrasound (POCUS), namely "ultrasound performed bedside and interpreted directly by the clinician." The purpose of this short review is to outline how POCUS can be used in patients with diseases of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. POCUS is not a replacement for comprehensive ultrasound, but rather allows physicians immediate access to clinical imaging for rapid diagnosis and efficient work-up and treatment of the patients. There are many indications for doing POCUS of the GI tract, including abdominal pain, diarrhea, palpable masses, and to detect fluid or free air in the abdominal cavity. To improve the visibility of deeper parts of the abdomen, the graded compression technique with the scan head is useful. During POCUS, the operator should look for signs of severe pathology including target lesions, the pseudo-kidney sign, the onion sign, dilated bowel loops, gastric retention, free fluid, and free air, depending on the actual clinical problem. We conclude that POCUS of the GI tract is very useful to provide a rapid diagnosis in many clinical scenarios.

Mors Gaudet Succurrere Vitae. The Role of Clinical Autopsy in Preventing Litigation Related to the Management of Liver and Digestive Disorders

Over the last 50 years, the number of clinical autopsies has decreased, but their role in assessing cause of death and clinical performance is still acknowledged. Few publications have studied their role in malpractice claim prevention. The paper aims to highlight the role of clinical autopsy in preventing errors and improve healthcare quality. A retrospective study was conducted on 28 clinical autopsies performed between 2015 and 2021 on patients dead unexpectedly after procedures for the diagnosis and treatment of digestive and hepatic diseases. After an accurate analysis of medical records and consultation with healthcare professionals, all cases were subjected to autopsy and histopathology. The data obtained were analyzed and shared with the risk-management team to identify pitfalls and preventive strategies. Post-mortem evaluations confirmed the clinical diagnosis only in six cases (21.4%). Discordances were observed in 10 cases (35.7%). In the remaining 12 cases (42.9%) the clinical diagnosis was labeled as "unknown" and post-mortem examinations made it possible to document the cause of death. Post-mortem examinations can concretely enrich hospital prevention systems and improve patient safety. The methodological approach outlined certainly demonstrates that, even in the risk-management field, "mors gaudet succurrere vitae" ("death delights in helping life").

Bowel ultrasonography in acute abdomen: beyond acute appendicitis

Acute abdomen is a common reason for consultation in the emergency department. A broad spectrum of entities, including diverse diseases of the gastrointestinal tract, can cause acute abdomen. Although computed tomography is the technique most widely used to evaluate acute abdomen in the emergency department, abdominal ultrasound is often performed first and allows bowel disease to be suspected. This article describes the ultrasound features of diverse bowel diseases that can cause acute abdomen, such as acute diverticulitis, bowel obstruction, gastrointestinal perforation, bowel ischemia, intraabdominal fat necrosis, and miscellaneous processes such as endometriosis, foreign bodies, or vasculitis. Radiologists must be familiar with the different features of abnormal bowel that can be detected incidentally in patients without clinical suspicion of bowel disease. This article focuses on ultrasonographic signs of bowel disease; other articles in this series cover the ultrasonographic signs of acute appendicitis, inflammatory bowel disease, and infectious diseases.

Gastrointestinal Ultrasound (GIUS) in Intestinal Emergencies - An EFSUMB Position Paper

An interdisciplinary group of European experts summarizes the value of gastrointestinal ultrasound (GIUS) in the management of three time-critical causes of acute abdomen: bowel obstruction, gastrointestinal perforation and acute ischemic bowel disease. Based on an extensive literature review, statements for a targeted diagnostic strategy in these intestinal emergencies are presented. GIUS is best established in case of small bowel obstruction. Metanalyses and prospective studies showed a sensitivity and specificity comparable to that of computed tomography (CT) and superior to plain X-ray. GIUS may save time and radiation exposure and has the advantage of displaying bowel function directly. Gastrointestinal perforation is more challenging for less experienced investigators. Although GIUS in experienced hands has a relatively high sensitivity to establish a correct diagnosis, CT is the most sensitive method in this situation. The spectrum of intestinal ischemia ranges from self-limited ischemic colitis to fatal intestinal infarction. In acute arterial mesenteric ischemia, GIUS may provide information, but prompt CT angiography is the gold standard. On the other end of the spectrum, ischemic colitis shows typical ultrasound features that allow correct diagnosis. GIUS here has a diagnostic performance similar to CT and helps to differentiate mild from severe ischemic colitis.

The value of ultrasound in diagnosis of pneumoperitoneum in emergent or critical conditions: A meta-analysis

Background:

Hollow organs perforation is a life-threatening condition. Early diagnosis and emergent intervention are important. Bedside ultrasound may be an alternative diagnostic tool for this condition.

Objective:

The aim of this study was to explore the diagnostic value of ultrasound of pneumoperitoneum in emergent or critical conditions through meta-analysis.

Methods:

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for potential studies. Then, two reviewers performed the processes of study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment independently. Finally, diagnostic indexes were analyzed with STATA 12.0 software (Serial No. 40120519635).

Results:

A total of five studies with moderate to high quality were eligible for meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio and their 95% confidence interval were 0.91 (95% confidence interval = 0.86–0.94), 0.96 (95% confidence interval = 0.75–0.99), 22.05 (95% confidence interval = 3.10–156.96), and 0.10 (95% confidence interval = 0.07–0.15), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.92 (95% confidence interval = 0.90–0.94).

Conclusion:

Abdominal ultrasound is a useful alternative tool in diagnosing of pneumoperitoneum. However, due to limited evidence, it is not yet indicated for routine clinical use.

Serum amylase and lipase and urinary trypsinogen and amylase for diagnosis of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The treatment of people with acute abdominal pain differs if they have acute pancreatitis. It is important to know the diagnostic accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis, so that an informed decision can be made as to whether the person with abdominal pain has acute pancreatitis. There is currently no Cochrane review of the diagnostic test accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase, either alone or in combination, in the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis in people with acute onset of a persistent, severe epigastric pain or diffuse abdominal pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR HTA and DARE), and other databases until March 2017. We searched the references of the included studies to identify additional studies. We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively. We also performed a 'related search' and 'citing reference' search in MEDLINE and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all studies that evaluated the diagnostic test accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. We excluded case-control studies because these studies are prone to bias. We accepted any of the following reference standards: biopsy, consensus conference definition, radiological features of acute pancreatitis, diagnosis of acute pancreatitis during laparotomy or autopsy, and organ failure. At least two review authors independently searched and screened the references located by the search to identify relevant studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies. The thresholds used for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis varied in the trials, resulting in sparse data for each index test. Because of sparse data, we used -2 log likelihood values to determine which model to use for meta-analysis. We calculated and reported the sensitivity, specificity, post-test probability of a positive and negative index test along with 95% confidence interval (CI) for each cutoff, but have reported only the results of the recommended cutoff of three times normal for serum amylase and serum lipase, and the manufacturer-recommended cutoff of 50 mg/mL for urinary trypsinogen-2 in the abstract.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies including 5056 participants met the inclusion criteria for this review and assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the index tests in people presenting to the emergency department with acute abdominal pain. The risk of bias was unclear or high for all of the included studies. The study that contributed approximately two-thirds of the participants included in this review was excluded from the results of the analysis presented below due to major concerns about the participants included in the study. We have presented only the results where at least two studies were included in the analysis.Serum amylase, serum lipase, and urinary trypsinogen-2 at the standard threshold levels of more than three times normal for serum amylase and serum lipase, and a threshold of 50 ng/mL for urinary trypsinogen-2 appear to have similar sensitivities (0.72 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.82); 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.92); and 0.72 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.84), respectively) and specificities (0.93 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.99); 0.89 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.99); and 0.90 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.93), respectively). At the median prevalence of 22.6% of acute pancreatitis in the studies, out of 100 people with positive test, serum amylase (more than three times normal), serum lipase (more than three times normal), and urinary trypsinogen (more than 50 ng/mL), 74 (95% CI 33 to 94); 68 (95% CI 21 to 94); and 67 (95% CI 57 to 76) people have acute pancreatitis, respectively; out of 100 people with negative test, serum amylase (more than three times normal), serum lipase (more than three times normal), and urinary trypsinogen (more than 50 ng/mL), 8 (95% CI 5 to 12); 7 (95% CI 3 to 15); and 8 (95% CI 5 to 13) people have acute pancreatitis, respectively. We were not able to compare these tests formally because of sparse data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As about a quarter of people with acute pancreatitis fail to be diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis with the evaluated tests, one should have a low threshold to admit the patient and treat them for acute pancreatitis if the symptoms are suggestive of acute pancreatitis, even if these tests are normal. About 1 in 10 patients without acute pancreatitis may be wrongly diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis with these tests, therefore it is important to consider other conditions that require urgent surgical intervention, such as perforated viscus, even if these tests are abnormal.The diagnostic performance of these tests decreases even further with the progression of time, and one should have an even lower threshold to perform additional investigations if the symptoms are suggestive of acute pancreatitis.

Perforation of gastrointestinal tract by poorly conspicuous ingested foreign bodies: radiological diagnosis

Perforation of gastrointestinal (GI) tract by ingested bone fragments, toothpicks and dentures is rare but remains an important life-threatening condition, and the outcomes are poorer when the diagnosis is delayed. Invariably, clinical and radiographic diagnosis is difficult as most patients will have no recollection of ingesting a foreign body, whereas these subtle objects are often not visible on radiographs. In search for the diagnosis, CT is the modality of choice, but ultrasound imaging may be first requested in patients presenting with symptoms of acute appendicitis, cholecystitis, pyelonephritis or pelvic inflammatory disease when an ingested foreign body is not considered. Although ultrasound has limited value in depicting a foreign body, it can frequently uncover secondary signs of perforation. However, the rarity of this condition combined with non-specific clinical presentation and the propensity of these small perforating objects to be subtle makes establishing the correct diagnosis by the radiologist challenging. Therefore, understanding of the appearances of GI perforation seen on CT images or general abdominal ultrasound will aid the radiologist in the diagnosis of this important yet often unsuspected condition. This will lead to earlier diagnosis and surgical management. In this article, we illustrate the spectrum of CT, radiographic and ultrasound imaging features seen in GI perforation caused by swallowed bone fragments, toothpicks, cocktail sticks and dentures.

Strategies to improve the outcome of emergency surgery for perforated peptic ulcer

BACKGROUND

Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a common surgical emergency that carries high mortality and morbidity rates. Globally, one-quarter of a million people die from peptic ulcer disease each year. Strategies to improve outcomes are needed.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for evidence related to the surgical treatment of patients with PPU. The clinical registries of trials were examined for other available or ongoing studies. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), systematic reviews and meta-analyses were preferred.

RESULTS

Deaths from peptic ulcer disease eclipse those of several other common emergencies. The reported incidence of PPU is 3.8-14 per 100,000 and the mortality rate is 10-25 per cent. The possibility of non-operative management has been assessed in one small RCT of 83 patients, with success in 29 (73 per cent) of 40, and only in patients aged less than 70 years. Adherence to a perioperative sepsis protocol decreased mortality in a cohort study, with a relative risk (RR) reduction of 0.63 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.41 to 0.97). Based on meta-analysis of three RCTs (315 patients), laparoscopic and open surgery for PPU are equivalent, but patient selection remains a challenge. Eradication of Helicobacter pylori after surgical repair of PPI reduces both the short-term (RR 2.97, 95 per cent c.i. 1.06 to 8.29) and 1-year (RR 1.49, 1.10 to 2.03) risk of ulcer recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Mortality and morbidity from PPU can be reduced by adherence to perioperative strategies.